Two more cold blooded gun murders, one on live TV, and nothing will change (once again.)


“Any chance of sane gun-control legislation in this country disappeared the moment we decided the brutal mass murder of 20 innocent school children was acceptable.” An acceptable price to pay to protect the availability of guns. We did that. I wish I could take credit for this quote, but I read it and can’t remember where. It’s not exact so a Google search has proved fruitless. It’s the saddest, most sobering summation of our gun-crazy culture I’ve ever heard. Every time there is a mass murder by some lone nut with a gun, people ask, “Will THIS be the turning point? The one event that finally wakes up the American people and demands their government finally do something about the easy availability of guns?” And time & again the answer is a resounding “No”. Not the mass murder of 20 school children and 6 teachers; not the murder of 12 movie-goers and wounding of 58 others in a theater in Aurora, Colorado; Not the murder of 9 church-goers in Charleston, SC; and now, not the murder of 2 TV reporters live on TV nor the “execution-style” murder of a Houston Sheriff’s Deputy, apparently targeted simply for being a police officer, by a black man allegedly angry over national news reports of police shootings of unarmed blacks (though none recently to explain the sudden burst of rage.) And once again, as sure as I’m sitting here typing this, not a damn thing will change as a result.

The gun-rights lunatics are already arguing that “if only the reporters and interviewee had been armed, this never would have happened.” Because in their fevered imaginations, everyone should be sporting a six-gun on their hips, ready to fire upon an approaching marauder at a moments’ notice… even in the middle of a TV interview.

GOP front-runner “The Donald”, says the murder of two TV journalists live on the air is not evidence of a “gun” problem but one of mental health.”

No, sorry Donald, while you and your followers may choose to blame the shooter’s mental state, the fact is, HE DIDN’T USE HIS CAR to kill those reporters (he could have just as easily have run them over in the parking lot), and he didn’t go after them with a knife, HE CHOSE A GUN. And he was able to get one. There are a LOT of crazy people in this world. We need basic common sense to keep guns out of their hands. And the guns they DO get, need to be less lethal.

Where is it written that an attacker is not stopped unless they are dead? Seriously wounding your attacker isn’t enough? Gun rights advocates like to play up the “crazed killer doped up on crack that keeps coming after you like The Terminator even after firing 12 rounds into them” scenario. How often does that REALLY happen? I mean seriously? We all need to be armed with a semi-automatic assault-rifle loaded with a high-capacity magazine stuffed with armor-piecing rounds “just-in-case” of this insanely rare nightmare scenario?

In their dark world, one in which the Federal Government is planning to attack Texas via underground passages in abandoned Wal*Marts, the answer is “Yes”. And THESE are the people shaping our gun legislation.

I truly believe that many politicians are afraid to anger this insane minority because they have access to lots of guns, go from zero-to-OUTRAGE faster than Daddy’s pickup, and believe The 2nd Amendment was written to give them the right to overthrow the government if they disapprove (it doesn’t.)

I actually heard one pro-gun-rights caller on the radio Friday say that “you can kill a guy with a paperclip.” So, how is it “you can kill a guy with a paperclip” and yet need enough military grade hardware to take down a charging rhino in order to protect your home from burglars?

Even Justice Scalia suggested a year or two ago that he could argue that the 2nd Amendment could apply to ANY handheld weapon (“bear” arms, meaning if you can hold it, you have a right to it), including “Surface-to-Air missiles” and even “a cannon if it were small enough”. (Amazing how far they’ll go to define the word “bear” but not the word “militia”.)

We have a Second Amendment right to bear arms. Fine. But you DON’T have a right to an “uninterrupted supply of armor piercing bullets” via 100-round drum-magazine. There is no Constitutional Amendment against prohibiting the production of anything more than a 38-caliber round. And just where in the Second Amendment does it say you have a right to “fingerprint-proof” gun-grips/rifle-stocks?

The only reason the NRA can’t fight the requirement to have a “gun license” is that pesky “well regulated” line, but if they could do away with it, you know they would in a heartbeat. The NRA has NOTHING to do with “gun-rights” and is all about promoting gun sales for the gun lobby. And nothing promotes sales like selling fear. “The bad guys are going to get you!”, so you buy a gun. But the bad guy is hopped up on drugs, so you need a bigger gun. “The government is coming for your guns”, so you need to buy an arsenal to fight them off. The NRA tipped its hand long ago when they started fighting for the gun rights of former felons, which only serves to heighten peoples fears and thus promote more gun sales.

The NRA’s Wayne LaPierre in 2013:

“I don’t know why the N.R.A. or the Second Amendment and lawful gun owners have to somehow end up in a story every time some crazy person goes off and kills children.”

“Every time”.

“More than once” and likely to happen again. That’s a chilling admission. The fact that even this sick SOB acknowledges that this is a reoccurring problem, says a lot. The fact that we’ve been unwilling to do anything about it says even more. Not the mass shooting of movie-goers in Colorado or Louisiana. Not the cold-blooded murder of a Houston police officer as he pumped gas into his patrol car. Not even the execution of two young journalists on live TV will be enough to pass the majority’s views on gun-control

Let's make a deal


Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



August 31, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Crime, Guns & Violence, Party of Life, Rants, Right-Wing Insanity

Republicans want to repeal the 14th Amendment? Maybe we should let them.


The question of whether or not to amend, or even flat-out repeal, the 14th Amendment… passed in 1868… is suddenly a hot topic in 2015. Donald Trump has put the issue of whether or not to continue “Birthright Citizenship” front & center in the debate over next years’ election. But the “14th Amendment” covers a lot more than just citizenship, so Republicans, don’t be so quick to say “Let’s do it!”. There is a case to be made, both pro & con for repealing the 14th by passing the 28th (a bit of mathematical poetry to that.)

Back during the 2008 presidential campaign, Sarah Palin was asked to name a Supreme Court decision… other than “Roe v Wade“… that she disagreed with. The Right howled in protest over an apparent “gotcha” question by “the Lib’rul Media” actively TRYING to “embarrass” her. Off the top of my head, I (and about 10 million other Lib’ruls) could easily cite “Plessy v Ferguson” (declaring “Separate but Equal” Constitutional) and “Dredd Scott” (slaves are Property) as examples of bad Supreme Court rulings, but how many of you have heard of “Buck vs Bell”?

Buck vs. Bell (1927) is the first Supreme Court case in which the 14th Amendment was cited as a defense. The issue? Whether or not the State of Virginia had the right to forcibly sterilize people (mostly the poor & “mentally ill”) against their will.


Eighteen year old Carrie Buck, a girl who was institutionalized by her family at the age of 9 after her own cousin raped & impregnated her (most likely to hide their shame of being seen with a pregnant nine year old daughter), lost her case and was sterilized against her will despite the fact the law was supposedly intended only to prevent generations of reproduction by “the feeble minded” and “immoral” members of society (do I hear any nominations?)

While it is highly unlikely such a horrific case (a law which has never been repealed by the way) would rule the same if put before the High Court today, it does demonstrate weaknesses in the wording of the 14th Amendment that could be remedied by a rewrite.

I find it endlessly fascinating that the same people that DEMANDED President Obama “Read the Constitution” (or “Read the Consitution” as the case may be) over “ObamaCare” never seem to be able to print out their latest edit long enough for him to do so. Republican front-runner Ben Carson… who once compared “ObamaCare” to “slavery” (for forcing doctors to treat patients. “Damn the Hippocratic Oath!”), also announced his support to repeal the 14th which bestowed American citizenship upon former slaves. Offensive for ANY candidate to suggest, but stretching incredulity for the only black candidate in the race. Lately, I’ve taken to quoting TV’s “Bud Bundy” when speaking of Dr. Carson:

Bud (after being congratulated by his father for teaching Kelly a number of scientific facts): “there is one slight problem. See, if you take a gallon of knowledge and pour it into a shot glass of a brain, you’re gonna spill some. In other words, certain basic information had to be sacrificed.” – Season 3, episode 22 of “Married with Children”. – (starting at 16:08)

Dr. Carson (who compared being gay to “bestiality & pedophilia”) may be a brilliant neurosurgeon, but take him outside his field of expertise and he’s a blithering idiot. The same people who want to bestow Constitutional Rights upon fetuses from the moment of conception ALSO want to repeal one of two Amendments they are relying on as justification for such a law. Wrap your head around that one for a moment (details below).

There are actually FIVE sections/clauses to the 14th Amendment. Congress at the time cobbled together a whole wish list of rights they felt the Constitution lacked, pouring them into a single amendment that would either pass together, or go down in flames together. “Repealing” the 14th Amendment would have FAR broader implications than simply ending “Birthright Citizenship”. The part that most of the GOP is suddenly intent to repeal:

Section 1: The “Personhood” clause:

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States;

But that’s not even the ENTIRETY of Section 1. It continues:

…nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

The second half of section 1 actually includes things they ARE RELYING ON to support their own case for their ridiculous “fetal personhood” Amendment: extending “due process” and “equal protection” to zygotes by having them declared “persons” so that the 14th applies to them too. Talk about “throwing the baby out with the bathwater.” I’ve gotta wonder how many “pro-Lifers”… with the intellectual acumen of Sarah Palin… are also calling for the repeal of the 14th?

Section 1 bolsters the Right of “due process” established in the FIFTH Amendment and codifies the right of “equal protection” the 5th only hinted at:

“[N]or shall any person . . . be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law…” – from The Fifth Amendment

The 5th Amendment is why we detain “enemy combatants” in Gitmo (in the nation of Cuba) and not U.S. soil. Notice the right of due process extends to any “person”, not “citizen”. As Americans, we don’t deny people their human rights simply because they aren’t a citizen of our country. If you are on our land, you have basic human rights. Period. End of story. So does it come as anyone’s surprise that the GOP would also just LOVE to deny basic human rights to non-citizens? Repeal the 14th, and the right of “equal protection” becomes a matter for debate. Do we REALLY want THIS congress and THIS Court deciding the scope of “equal protection”? If anything, we need to repeal the “foreign soil loophole” in the 5th so that human rights extend to ANYONE in U.S. custody regardless of where they are held. This is what makes us better than they are. The ONLY way to win is to own the Moral High ground. Thanks to the GOP, “The Land of the Free” has maintained a beacon of hypocrisy 80 miles off-shore that has kept us at war for nearly a decade & a half.

Lack of the phrase “natural born” before “persons” in Section 1 is also what permited the “Citizens United” ruling that “Corporations are people” with the Constitutional right to donate limitless sums of money to political candidates.

Section 2: the “Equal Representation” clause:

Section 2: Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed. But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State.

This is where we get Gerrymandering from. It’s why Governor Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts created a Congressional district shaped like a salamander to ensure his Party won control of The House of Representatives in 1812. Even though the Supreme Court ruled his shameless political grab unconstitutional, it hasn’t stopped politicians (on both sides) to this day from drawing bizarrely shaped voting districts based more on politics than population.

Despite receiving fewer overall votes in the 2012 & 2014 elections, Republicans retained control of The House thanks entirely to their 14th Amendment Right to redraw the district lines to favor their candidates. And should Democrats retake Congress in 2020 (which is the REAL “next big election”, not 2016), they too will rely on this right to draw those lines back. But to end this cycle of indefensible Gerrymandering, we need a Constitutional Amendment mandating a more mathematical, less political method of drawing district boundaries.)

Section 3: The “elect no traitors” clause:

Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof. But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability.

Basically, this rule was added to prevent “traitors” from the Civil War who took an oath to defeat the United States, from being elected to Federal office. Doesn’t really apply much today… unless perhaps by some catastrophic galactic hiccup Rick Perry were to become the GOP nominee and forced to defend his (ridiculous & false) threat/belief that the State of Texas might seceded from the union over “ObamaCare”. Personally, I could argue either direction for whether this Section stays or goes.

Section 4: “The Public Debt shall not be questioned” clause:

Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void.

Remember this one? This was a hot topic when the GOP threatened (and eventually did) shut down the Federal Government over the issue of whether or not to raise the Cap on how much the Federal government could borrow to pay its obligations. It’s original intent was to prevent Southern states rejoining the Union after the Civil War from holding the Federal government hostage if it did not pay the South’s war debt.

Clearly, the wording here needs to be strengthened/clarified since it clearly was not enough to stop Republicans from questioning the Debt THEY THEMSELVES INCURRED.

And finally…

Section 5: Only Congress has the power to enforce these proclamation.

Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

How is the GOP able to abuse Section 1 (the Gitmo & “Citizens United” loopholes), Section 2 (Gerrymandering unconstitutional but they do it anyway) and Section 4 (unquestioned Debt) of the 14th Amendment? Look no further than Section 5. It’s gotta go.

So careful what you ask for Republicans. If it looks like 2016 is going to be a big year for Democrats and recapture of The House is a possibility, we just might be inclined to repeal that pesky 14th Amendment for you.

Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



August 24, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Civil Rights, Election, Immigration Reform, myth busting, Partisanship, Party of Life, Politics, Racism, rewriting history, Right-Wing Hypocrisy, Unconstitutional

GOP Frontrunners Reveal Their Moronic Dark Agendas for the Country


The presidential candidates of BOTH parties descended upon the Iowa State Fair this past weekend, but when reporters asked the GOP frontrunners for policy specifics, their horrifying agenda should send shivers down the spine of any sane voter. Donald Trump said the problem of illegal immigration has become SO bad we have “no choice” but to round up & deport… not just all 11 Million undocumented immigrants (at best a logistical nightmare if it were even possible at all, which it isn’t)… but their American-born children as well. That could mean deporting anywhere from 20 to 35 million people. The resources to pull off such a monumental (and COSTLY) task staggers the imagination. The cost/benefit alone is imperceptible. Trump sees this as a bizarre “act of kindness” to avoid “splitting up families” by revoking the Constitutional right of “Birthright Citizenship”. Neurosurgeon-turned-politician Ben Carson… who uses The Bible as his governing guidebook… continued to propose his moronic “10% Flat Tax” (based on 10% tithing). When asked about the morality of raising taxes on millions of poor people while giving a MASSIVE tax cut to millionaires & billionaires (yesterday on Fox “news” Sunday no less), his response was to talk about “fairness”. Taking 10% of the income of a poor person may be the difference between buying food or medicine that week after they’ve paid their rent & utilities on their meager minimum wage salary, but the billionaire who just saw his taxes plunge from 32% to just 10%… I don’t think he’ll be feeling an “equal” share of pain. And speaking of the “minimum wage”, Trump told Chuck Todd that he wants to “keep it right where it is”, because… you know… “American corporations are struggling” (which is what happens when you pay your customers sub-subsistence wages), yet they always seem to find a way to pay their CEO’s obscene milti-million dollar salaries and huge bonues. Rubio thinks Cuba is as dangerous as Iran, Jeb had a really bad day (again), and Governor Huckabee promised “6% economic growth” if elected. To call such a promise “clueless” would be (beyond) kind.

The United States has NEVER even approached a six percent growth rate. Not even close. Under the record-breaking economy of Bill Clinton, we enjoyed 3.8% economic growth. Only Truman, Kennedy and Johnson (all Progressive Democrats BTW) saw higher growth at 4.8%, 5.2% and 5.1% respectively. Wanna know what country DOES see a typical annual growth rate of well over 7%? China, with over 1.2 Billion factory workers paid pennies a day. So unless The Huckster is suggesting Communism as the solution to our “economic woes”, the fact he even thinks “6 percent economic growth” in a nation roughly 1/4 the population of China is feasible should already disqualify him from being put in charge of the largest economy in the world.

Back to Trump’s plan to deport 35 million undocumented immigrants AND their U.S. citizen children, which would come at extraordinary costs. 94% of these undocumented immigrants have committed no crime other than entering the country illegally. They are contributing members of society. ALL of them pay taxes, be it sales tax or in many cases even state & federal income taxes. The hit on food prices as the number of migrant farm workers plummets is also another tangential side-effect of Trump’s delusional goal worth considering. Meanwhile the crime rate among undocumented immigrants is actually LOWER than that of the general population despite what Trump and his devoted followers (ie: fellow bigots) believe. So the cost/benefit just doesn’t pan out… especially for someone who believes the Deficit is still growing (it’s not. It’s now less than half of what Bush handed Obama) and “expected to reach $2.3 Trillion dollars in the coming years”… a total nonsense figure that AFAICT he pulled out of his butt. But, in true-to-Republican form, Republicans NEVER consider the consequences of their actions (see: Iraq). They are creatures of instinct that think nuance is “gay”. Another Trump “solution”: Defeat ISIS by depriving them of “their chief source of revenue” ala “bombing the Iraqi oilfields”. By contrast, they think “sanctions” will stop Iran from building nukes, but the only way to stop ISIS from selling oil is to “BOMB THEM” (shades of George Carlin). Besides the fact I’m sure Iraq would be just thrilled if we started carpet bombing their oilfields, the “unforeseen” consequence would be to create an artificial oil shortage that causes international oil prices to spike. And the last time that happened, gasoline prices surpassed $4/gallon, the cost of production skyrocketed… as did consumer prices… resulting in global economic collapse.

Carson is also too much crazy for just one paragraph. Also interviewed at the Fair by Fox “news” Sunday, when asked about his staunch “no exceptions” position on abortion, Carson argued that in cases of rape or incest, the victim can simply be given “anti-ovulation drugs” to “prevent the egg from becoming fertilized in the first place” so that abortion is not necessary. Yes, maybe… if you administer the drug within hours of being raped. And thanks to the “slut-shaming” culture of our society, not every women is quick to reveal that she has been raped. Victims of violent rape are often too afraid to go to the police right away to promptly report the crime. Children are also slow to reveal when they have been raped. The drugs themselves are also not 100% effective. Did I mention Carson is a doctor? He clearly is a prime example of what happens when you pour a gallon of knowledge into a shotglass of a brain. You’re going to spill some. Clearly, Carson suffered brain-overload becoming a neurosurgeon with no room to learn anything more.

Marco Rubio… the child of Cuban immigrants… thinks improving relations with Cuba is as “dangerous” as our anti-nuclear treaty with Iran. The “threat” Cuba poses to U.S. security I haven’t quite deciphered just yet, and I’m not prepared to drop that much acid just to find out, so it is likely to remain a mystery.

Jeb Bush gave a speech that was as Milquetoast as toast soaking in milk. Looking every bit as uncomfortable and out-of-place as Mitt Romney four years ago did explaining to the same audience that “Corporations are people, my friend”, in the short one-minute clip seen below, Bush is challenged by an audience member when he tried to assert that President Obama “could have left some combat troops in Iraq” in violation of the “Status of Forces Agreement” signed by his own brother. But Bush goes completely off the rails in another question when he inadvertently points out that some of the same people advising President Obama on Iraq also advised his brother and his father, “two Republican administrations” he concedes… then pauses upon realizing he’s making his own case against himself:


Wow that’s painful to watch. I almost feel sorry for him. Almost.

The Top 4 GOP frontrunners as of just last week have already shifted according to the latest Fox “news” poll. Trump… following an underwhelming debate performance and post “Megyn Kelly dustup”… not only remains in first place but his lead has actually grown by 2 points (as I predicted last week). Cruz & Carson swapped places for 2nd & 3rd (with Carson now in 2nd place, also post-underwhelming debate performance), and Bush returned to the Top Tier (also as predicted months ago). Republican voters apparently started to remember why Fiorina wasn’t on the “Top-10 Debate” stage last week, as she quickly sinks from #4 to #7 in just three days.

During Fox “news” Sunday, George Will… who despises the reality-TV star Trump and thinks he is hurting the GOP, summed it up this way:

“Try to imagine putting nuclear weapons in the hands of Donald Trump.”

Is there a GOP candidate you could substitute for “Trump” in that statement and not be equally terrified?

Donald Trump, a xenophobic, racist, misogynistic homophobe is the GOP frontrunner… not “in spite of” the fact he is all those things, but BECAUSE he is all those things. Trump IS today’s GOP.

Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



August 17, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Abortion rights, Economy, Election, Immigration Reform, Jobs, Middle East, Money, Party of Life, Politics, Right-Wing Insanity, Taxes, Unconstitutional

21 Things I (Re)learned From the GOP Debates


All SEVENTEEN Republican presidential candidates took part in at least one of three GOP debates last week (one on CSPAN & two on Fox.) I don’t know how many of you also watched the full 2-hour Prime Time GOP debate on Fox last Thursday, but I definitely wasn’t surprised by anything I heard (other than the fact Ronald Reagan’s name was only mentioned 2 [3?] times. Probably a record low.) Fox doesn’t like Donald Trump, that much was made clear, and… in case you didn’t hear it the first 47 times, Rubio’s parents were poor emigres from Cuba and Kasich’s dad was a mailman. The two big winners of the primetime debate weren’t even on the stage: Carly Fiorina, who had a clip of her from the earlier “Kid’s Table” debate replayed during the Prime Time debate, and Bernie Sanders, whose own Live Tweets during the debate were more re-Tweeted than ANY of the GOP candidates’ comments. Beyond that, there were plenty of things I pretty-much already knew about the candidates that they only helped solidify in my memory:

The first “debate” on C-SPAN last Monday… really just a “getting-to-know-you” series of interviews… consisting of 11 in-person candidates + 3 via remote, couldn’t fill a 500 seat theater. And during the first Fox “Kid’s Table” debate of the bottom seven polling candidates, there were more people on stage than in the audience. Those are the only polls you need.

Okay, so what I learned last week:

  1. Accepting Medicaid funding under “ObamaCare” dramatically slowed the rate of growth in state health care costs, yet “ObamaCare” must absolutely be repealed. – Ohio Gov. Kasich defended accepting Medicaid funds under the ACA by citing the fact that doing so led to Ohio having the slowest health care cost growth in the nation, an “achievement” that was wildly cheered by the Conservative audience… as was every call to fully repeal “every word” of “ObamaCare”.
  2. The best way to fight crime is to strip cities of their federal law-enforcement funding. – Jeb Bush blasted so-called “sanctuary cities” (cities that don’t actively seek out undocumented immigrants for deportation/arrest) following the shooting death of a 32 year old woman in San Francisco by a man arrested three times for being in the country illegally. The proposed solution? Strip these cities of their federal law-enforcement funding until they agree to waste precious resources seeking out & prosecuting undocumented immigrants… the vast majority of whom actually pay taxes and commit no crime other than simply being here illegally. And just how did he get a gun anyway?
  3. The best way to fight abortion is to defund the leading provider of free birth control. – Nearly all (if not all) of the candidates on stage, reacting to their revulsion to a series of heavily edited and highly prejudicial under-cover videos of Planned Parenthood of America employees taken by an anti-abortion group out to “expose” the organization as illegally profiting off abortions, vowed to defund the organization. PPA is the largest provider of free birth control in the country, and defunding them could mean a huge increase in the number of unplanned pregnancies. And Republicans truly believe that if you close every abortion clinic in the country, women will simply stop having abortions.
  4. You’re weak on terror if you can’t admit all terrorists are Muslims. – Ted Cruz (natch) asked how can we expect President Obama to protect us from terrorism if he won’t even acknowledge that all terrorists are “Muslims”. The president’s unwillingness to offend an entire religion of 1.3 billion people by lumping them in with a sub-culture of several thousand religious extremists proves he’s a danger to the country.
  5. Jeb blames Obama for the SoFA signed by his brother. The younger Bush blamed President Obama for the withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq by the end of 2011, leading to the rise of ISIS. The decision to withdraw ALL U.S. forces from Iraq by the end of 2011 was one of President Bush’s final acts as president, signing the “Status of Forces Agreement” in December of 2008. Jeb may have missed this announcement because his brother was busy ducking shoes at the time. ISIS actually already existed at the time, but known by a different name: “al Quida in the Arabian Peninsula” or “AQAP” for short.
  6. A Bush can promise an almost unheard of 4% GDP growth despite the fact his brother & dad had 2 of the WORST GDP growth rates in the past 100 years. The lesser Shrub repeated his belief that he could achieve an astounding 4% annual GDP growth (really good growth would be about 3.5%) if elected and we followed his economic policies. His brother, GW, dismissed the Clinton economy when he ran in 2000, asking voters to imagine “how much better” the astounding Clinton economy could have been if only a Republican president had been in charge of the Republican controlled congress of the past six years. And so, armed with the EXACT SAME Republican-controlled Congress for the next 6 years, economic disaster befell the country, resulting in global economic collapse.
  7. The Iran deal is a disaster. You don’t make a deal with your enemies unless you get absolutely everything you want up front. – Mike Huckabee blasted the Iran deal for failing to get Iran to concede to ALL of our demands, including the release of political prisoners, first… a move that unquestionably would have insured NO deal at all. President Obama has rightly made the point that it will be much easier to negotiate those things later with an “unarmed” Iran than trying to do so with one with nukes. Conservative pundit George Will probably epitomized this irrational line of thinking during yesterday’s Fox “news” Sunday when he pointed out that WITHOUT an agreement, Iran gets “14 new global trading partners and work begins on a nuclear bomb tomorrow using all that new wealth” BUT the deal is a BAD thing because WITH the deal, Iran gets 15 new trading partners, and work begins on a nuclear weapon (apparently under the noses of inspectors) EIGHT YEARS from now.
  8. You can oppose gay marriage and still attend a gay wedding. – Governor Kasich was asked to explain how he could oppose gay marriage and yet attend a gay wedding between two friends. He couched his answer in saying that if his daughter came out as gay, he would “still love & support her”, calling it “unconditional love.” But when it comes to marriage, apparently there is still just one condition.
  9. Rand Paul & Trump conceded the painful truth that our politicians can be bought, but Republicans just don’t care. – The first question of the debate led to a heated exchange between Rand Paul and Donald Trump, who defended contributing to candidates of BOTH Parties as a way to control them. Paul conceded this is exactly what is taking place, but was not followed up by ANY discussion of the fact that TWO (if not more) presidential candidate just acknowledgment that our politicians can be controlled by big money donors, or the poisonous influence of money in politics. Instead, in fact, one or two candidates on stage with Trump laughingly asked him for money.
  10. Kasich apparently balanced the budget in spite of Clinton tax increase. – Numerous times before the debates and twice on stage, Governor Kasich bragged about how he led the last U.S. Congressional Budget Committee to balance the budget. But not once has Kasich conceded that the 1994 Clinton tax increase on the wealthy is what made balancing the budget possible.
  11. Republican governors like to cite their achievements under Obama & Clinton but not under Bush. – It’s a maxim that Democratic presidents make Republican governors look good. George W. Bush, as governor of Texas, gave no credit to the Clinton economy for the economic success of his state while running in 2000. In 2008, neither Romney nor Huckabee ran on the economic success of their states under the Bush Administration. In 2012, Governor Perry tried to credit the “amazing Texas recovery” under Obama’s first term to his own leadership and not soaring oil prices and rampant state public sector hiring. But there wouldn’t have been anything to recover from had it not of been for his good buddy President Bush.
  12. A Flat Tax doesn’t favor the rich, and raising taxes on the poor helps the poor. – At least three (and almost certainly more) of the GOP contenders advocated the absurd flat or “Fair” tax as the cure for our fiscal woes. Rand Paul wants a 14.5% across-the-board flat tax on everyone, while Evangelical Ben Carson suggested a 10% flat tax… a number taken from The Bible based on a 10% tithe… as the perfect tax rate for the country. Paul, on Fox “news” Sunday yesterday repeatedly denied that DRASTICALLY reducing the tax rate on millionaires & billionaires would create a $3-Trillion dollar annual deficit, which he apparently believes can be made up by drastically raising taxes on the poor and cutting government spending… which naturally would include cutting services to the poor. All this he said would in fact “help” the poor, not hurt them. And someone really should explain to Carson the difference between funding a church to provide church services and funding a $1.5 Tillion dollar government with its own Army currently engaged in two wars.
  13. Post debate, the Top 4 GOP favorites are presently a 2nd year foreign born senator and 3 political novices who have never held public office. – You may remember that the primary knocks on Obama by Republicans during the 2008 election was that he was not experienced enough to be president after serving as Senator for “only two years”, and that he was supposedly “born in another country (Kenya)”, rendering him ineligible to be president. Check out the graphic at the start of this post. After last Thursday’s debate, the Top 4 favorite candidates among Republican voters is three people who have NEVER held public office (Trump, Carson & Fiorina), and a Senator who not only took office a mere two years ago before deciding to run for president, but was in fact born in another country (a fact Cruz does not dispute, but claims he is still eligible because his mother was born in the U.S…. unlike Obama whose mother was born in Kansas.)
  14. Trump, Walker, Rubio, Carson & Huckabee, all talked about how “pro-Life” they are… except when it comes to the life of the mother. – Sen. Rubio on Meet the Press yesterday, defending his opposition to an abortion exception even to protect the life of the mother… a position so extreme it puts him at odds with 87% of the American people, said: “If I’m going to err, it’s going to be on side of life.” Unless of course it’s the life of the mother. The other candidates mentioned shared this view. The irony is that if a pregnancy endangers the mother’s life and the fetus is not viable, BOTH will die anyway. And in many cases, the mother will die a horrible and excruciating death. These same Holy Rollers also believe a fetus has Constitutional rights at the moment of conception (Huckabee: “5th & 14th”). So bye-bye hormonal birth control (“The Pill”) or invitro-fertilization.
  15. The only two GOP candidates to express any belief in Climate Change still call it “a theory” that’s “not proven.” – In 2012, Governor Kasich took some heat (forgive the pun) from Republicans for daring to suggest that Climate Change is real and that maybe we would should be doing something about it. But when that position was roundly booed by the academics in Thursday’s audience (snark), Kasich quickly backtracked, turning to the famed “it’s still an unproven theory” chestnut… you know, like gravity or Relativity. The only believer/non-believer, Rand Paul, said he is “not sure anybody exactly knows why” the Earth is warming and therefore we needent go to extreme lengths… like impose “regulations”… to curb it.
  16. Record job growth and plunging unemployment proves Obama’s economic record is a disaster and the economy still needs to be “jump started.” – The day after the debate, the latest BLS jobs report proclaimed that 215,000 new jobs were created in July. You have to go back to March of this year to find a month that produced fewer than 200,000 jobs. The Unemployment Rate held steady at 5.3% as more and more long-term unemployed optimistically resume looking for work. With a year and a half left in the Obama presidency, an unemployment rate of just 4.9%… just 0.4% below where it is now… is not out of the realm of possibility. 4.9% was the record low unemployment rate when President Clinton supposedly handed President Bush a Recession.
  17. Trump: “Our vets have to be taken care of and we must end ObamaCare.” – We must take care of our vets. Screw everyone else.
  18. The VA is a vital part of caring for our veterans, but Socialized Medicine is evil. – Senator Rubio praised the Veterans Administration while criticizing the poor state befalling it under President Obama… of which Republicans refused to increase funding commensurate with the demand created by two simultaneous wars. Someone should point out that the VA he so praised and promises to support is 100% Socialized Medicine where the hospitals are all owned by the government and every doctor is a government employee.
  19. Ted Cruz thinks we get to pick & choose where we place our embassies in foreign countries. – In a troubling and widely overlooked comment, Senator Cruz vowed to move the U.S. embassy in Israel to Jerusalem. Not only does the U.S. (nor any country) get to dictate where its embassy is located within another country, but vowing to plant our flag in the disputed territory of Jerusalem would not only be wildly inflammatory to the Muslim world and widely (and correctly) seen as us “taking sides” in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, but it would almost certainly make our embassy a prime target for terrorism, endangering the lives of every American inside. But hey, it’s not like this is Benghazi or anything, right?
  20. “Our newest B2 Bomber” is from 1962. – Huckabee bemoaned the fact that our military is still using outdated weaponry dating back decades, citing the fact our “newest” B2 Bomber still in active duty was built when Kennedy was still president. Perhaps it’s because we use B1 Stealth Bombers now, not WWII era “flying fortresses”. This is the SAME argument held over from the 2012 campaign, when President Obama had to point out to Gov. Romney that “old” weapons of war… like “horses and bayonets” are phased out over time and replaced with more modern weaponry.
  21. Iran released the hostages the moment Ronald Reagan was sworn in because they were terrified of him, not because he had already struck an illegal deal with them. – Sen. Cruz… who apparently learned everything he knows about Ronald Reagan listening to Conservative Talk Radio, said that a Cruz presidency would strike the same fear into the hearts of our enemies as Ronald Reagan did. The Iranians were apparently SO fearful of what President Reagan might do to them that they released the hostages the moment he was sworn in. NOT because it was an intentional slap-in-the-face to President Carter by Iran, nor did it have anything to do with Reagan secretly promising to trade “arms for hostages”, subverting the negotiating process under Carter and possibly keeping the hostages prisoner for longer than they might have been otherwise.


The big question after the debate was whether Trump’s unpopular refusal to say he wouldn’t go 3rd Party, plus his poor response to some pointed questions during the debate, followed by some offensive… possibly misogynistic… comments about Fox’s Megyn Kelly for calling out his misogyny during the debate, would finally hurt Trump in the polls? Are you kidding? Of course not! Republicans carry the ultimate “persecution complex”. They epitomize the “victim” mentality. The blacks & Mexicans are all criminals out to do them bodily harm and a drain on society costing them money. The “gays” are converting the U.S. to accept their immorality and “destroying the very fabric of our nation”. There is even a “War on Christmas”. Everyone is out the get them. And the more The Media attacks their leader Donald Trump, the more they identify with him and will dig in their heels to defend him. Even disparaging POW’s and past video of him saying totally contradictory things is not enough to sway them. This current spat with Fox’s Kelly is the closest thing I’ve seen yet that could endanger his standing in the polls. The more Trump is marginalized, the more his supporters will dig in. Nothing shy of him making openly misogynistic comments about another female Conservative darling could tarnish Trump in the eyes of his fellow “victims”.

Prior to the GOP Debate, Democrats were popping popcorn. After the GOP Debate, Democrats were popping champagne corks. Meanwhile, Republicans were popping Tums. And for good reason. 17 candidates, and this is the best they’ve got.


Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



August 10, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Election, Party of Life, Politics, Predictions, Religion, rewriting history, Taxes

(GOP Debate Hiatus)


Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is on Hiatus this week

pending the first GOP Presidential Debate (Thursday, Aug 6, 2015).

Be sure to check back for our full report next week. – Mugsy


August 3, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Politics

Despite History of Deceptively Edited Videos, Right Wing Videographers Still Taken Seriously


Right-Wing activists have a checkered history of posting deceptively edited video to suggest events are taking place that in fact aren’t, and despite acknowledging that these videos have been selectively edited by the author, The Media still takes them seriously and gives their “findings” an aire of legitimacy & respectability by suggesting they are evidence of something terrible. Then the accused is paraded around TV defending themselves having to point out (again) that the damning video was chopped & spliced within an inch of its life, and STILL the accusations are taken seriously.

Anyone else remember Shirley Sherrod? In 2010, an intentionally deceptively edited video of her talking about overcoming past prejudices and treating everyone with respect was promoted by a Right-Wing smear site called “” (named for it’s RW ambush-videographer founder who had a history of doing this very thing) as PROOF of an openly racist appointee of the Obama Administration bragging of refusing to help an elderly white couple. Another infamous hack wannabee ambush-videographer named James O’Keefe used seriously & deceptively edited video to get the Social Services Organization “Acorn” defunded and put out of business by posting a video of himself claiming to be a pimp seeking housing assistance for him & his hoes, going so far as to post a ridiculous video of him and his girlfriend dressed like a cartoonish caricature of what he believed a pimp & prostitute looks like. Truth was, O’Keefe did NOT in fact wear his ridiculous costume during his interview, editing out responses by the dubious Acorn agent, not even AWARE of the phone call the agent made to authorities after O’Keefe left after playing along with his little ruse.

Seeking a return to the spotlight, craving his sudden fame from 2010, O’Keefe again tried to peddle yet another deceptively edited video during the 2012 election claiming to have evidence of undocumented immigrants and even “the dead” were casting ballots in South Carolina as evidence of the need for “Voter ID” laws. But O’Keefe’s reputation proceeded him, and further investigation found his claims to be utter horseshit.

Two more questionably edited videos were released in the past two weeks: one, showing the traffic stop & arrest of “Sandra Bland”, who was pulled over for “changing lanes without signalling” (an incredibly petty offense considering she appeared to be simply moving out of the way of the officer’s cruiser). An understandably annoyed Bland was screamed at, ordered out of her vehicle, wrestled to the ground and arrested, only to end up dead three days later, found hanging by the neck in her jail cell. The video of the event released by the police department was clearly edited, with passing vehicles appearing & disappearing) in a manner that raised questions about what was omitted and why. But one wonders why the video had to be chopped up (not just trimmed) in the first place? No news organization would show an entire FIVE minute arrest video live on the air without editing it themselves. Why did the Hempstead (TX) PD feel the need to release an edited version of the video?

And more recently, another deceptively edited video by “Pro-Life” activists discussing the purchase of fetal tissue for their research laboratory, was made public last week, creating a firestorm. While Planned Parenthood acknowledged and apologized for the “flippant” manner by which some of the people in the video discussed the subject, the video… which the authors claimed was PROOF of PPA profiting off fetal tissue donations (which is illegal)… “innocently” clipping out the ten times the agents pointed out that PPA does not profit from the “sale” of fetal tissue and that all payment simply goes to recoup the costs of getting the tissue/organs to the recipient intact and viable.

Republicans truly believe that if we closed every abortion clinic in the country, women would simply stop having abortions. Closing abortion clinics doesn’t prevent abortions, just SAFE abortions. It’s the whole reason they exist.

But “Planned Parenthood of America” (PPA) is FAR more than just an “abortion clinic”. Despite inviting on famed Medical Researcher Carly Fiorina (yes, that’s snark. Fiorina is the failed former tech CEO turned failed Senate candidate turned soon-to-be-failed 2016 presidential candidate) onto Fox “news” Sunday yesterday to criticize the organization, host Chris Wallace had to point out that “abortions” are only a small percentage of some of the healthcare services provided by PPA:

PPA Services
Wallace points out some PPA services that would be lost if their funding was cut


Fiorina’s snarky response: “I thought that’s what ObamaCare was for?” So now she NEEDS ObamaCare to allow her to eliminate a medical services provider? Besides being a monster hypocrite, let’s not forget that Fiorina (like EVERY Republican), wants to do away with “ObamaCare” too. And the REASON that PPA provides these services is because many clinics do not. Certainly not as cheaply.

(BTW: If you Google Fiorina’s exchange with Jess McIntosh of “Emily’s List” on FnS yesterday, Fiorina apparently “DESTROYED” McIntosh despite making bizarre non-sequitur arguments about “fetal heartbeat” in a discussion about donating tissue from deceased fetuses, and choosing instead to ignore any discussion regarding the lives that are SAVED by these tissue donations, instead complaining bitterly that the people outraged by this “highly edited” video didn’t seem to mind attacking “Mitt Romney” over his “heavily edited [97%] video or Edward Snowden.” Huh??? Unless someone spiced Romney’s words to form a sentence Romney never actually spoke, or left out him saying “of course we must care about everybody!”, she’s sounding pretty desperate by this point. And I have NO idea what she’s talking about regarding Snowden… whom, to the best of my knowledge, has only released documents, not a video.)

Outraged Republicans (are there any other kind?) are now demanding that we discontinue ALL Federal funding to PPA (something they’ve been looking for an excuse to do for years) over this video, claiming it is PROOF of crimes being committed by the organization. Actually, it’s more the flippant & cavalier attitudes of the agents filmed that is the source of their outrage. But just as in ANY social situation, we REFLECT the attitudes of the people we are talking to. The videographers were flippant & cavalier (even joking) about what they were requesting, and the agents unfortunately responded in kind. Most people don’t respond to smiling happy guests with the stern & dower seriousness that quite possibly might be called for in that situation.

So these clearly chopped up videos are shopped around, the mainstream media catches wind of them via a flurry of Right Wing outrage on The Twitter Machine, and they are hyped on the network news hoping to spur the very outrage & controversy the authors intended. Willing patsies, and one wonders if they even realize they are being used… or for that matter, if they even care.

Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



July 27, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Abortion rights, Civil Rights, Crime, fake scandals, myth busting, Right-wing Facism, Scandals

Party That Swift-Boated John Kerry in 2004 is Outraged By Trump’s Attack on McCain


Maybe you remember this from 2004:

RNC Conventioneers mocking John Kerry's Purple Heart
Attendees at the 2004 RNC Convention mocking Sen John Kerry’s Purple Heart
by wearing “Purple Heart Band-Aids” and claiming his injuries were little more than a scratch.
Campaign officials told Conventioneers to stop, but Bush/Cheney never publicly condemned them.


“Donald Trump Slams John McCain’s Military Service!”  The Sunday shows yesterday all covered the OUTRAGE over Donald Trump’s “offensive” comments regarding John McCain’s military service (after demanding to see the presidents’ birth certificate for six years, and slamming an entire race of people, NOW they’re outraged?) Here they are in case you missed them:

Trump: “John McCain is a hero because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured.”

Now, everyone listening to those comments knows EXACTLY what he meant:

  • “John McCain is a hero [ONLY] because he was captured. I like people who weren’t captured [because if you were captured, you must have done something wrong/foolish].

There is no question THAT is what Trump meant. (And listening to him respond to the parade of reporters detailing McCain’s service, it is also clear the only thing he knew about McCain’s service was that “he was a POW.” Far be it for me to take Sen. McCain’s side on just about anything, but there is no question his heroism post capture earned him that distinction.)

But instead, he defended himself… NOT by defending his comments but by implying he was saying something different from what everyone KNOWS he meant. Trump… live via phone on ABC’s “ThisWeek”… told Martha Radditz that “I didn’t say [McCain] wasn’t a war hero. I said he WAS a war hero [pause] becausehewascaptured.” Radditz followed up by asking what he meant by: “I like people who weren’t captured”? Trump’s response was to suggest he felt troops that aren’t captured don’t receive the Media attention that captured soldiers do.

He never explained why one should have any reason to “prefer” one over the other. Likewise, Trump will NEVER apologize because THAT would mean admitting he made a mistake, and Conservatives are completely phobic over even the possibility of admitting to a mistake.

But all that is but a side-show in the GOP circus. What gets me is the sudden feigned OUTRAGE by the GOP and the other Republican candidates over how Donald Trump “denigrated the service of a military hero.”

I’m sure Secretary John Kerry, watching the news last week, had to hold his eyes shut with both hands to keep them from rolling out of his head.

Give me a freaking break! Conservative reverence for our troops starts & ends with the soldier’s [perceived] Party affiliation. We already know this to be the fact. During the 2004 Presidential race, throughout most of 2003, it appeared Liberal hero Howard Dean was going to be the Democratic nominee, with Kerry running in 3rd place. But when the race turned nasty between the top two Democratic front-runners on the eve of the New Hampshire primary, Kerry filled the void as unsophisticated primary voters believed Kerry’s war hero status would be impossible for the Draft-dodging duo of Bush/Cheney to defeat. Silly them.

Rank & file Republicans found it difficult… if not impossible… to defend President Bush’s “military record”, so the solution was to neutralize Kerry’s “war hero” status by latching onto the claims of a longtime Kerry critic… another Vietnam “swiftboat vet”… that never actually served with John Kerry, claiming to know for a fact Kerry’s medals were not “earned” and “unjustified”, claiming his injuries were “self-inflicted”, and that he never actually killed the enemy soldier for which he earned him his Silver Star (Kerry also earned a Bronze Star and three Purple Hearts.) BTW: If you can find a copy of “Going Up River”… a documentary about John Kerry volunteering for military service in Vietnam only to return to champion the fight to end it… I highly recommend it. I came away far more impressed with him than expected.

(Note: Rewatching movie now and was reminded of how Republican Senate candidate Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)… whom never served… compared his opponent Max Cleland… who left three limbs on the battlefield in Vietnam,,, to Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. Chambliss won.)

By the time you read these words, we should already know if Right-Wing talk radio has decided to stand by Trump or throw him under the bus. But my prediction is that because so many of them are fellow racist Chicken-Hawk draft dodgers like him that likewise despise John McCain, and still feel their beloved Birther King represents them on the issues, they’ll either defend him or find a completely different reason to toss him overboard (such as his comments about “religion” in the same speech.)

Birther King


Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



July 20, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Election, Politics, Predictions, Right-Wing Hypocrisy

15 Questions That Should Be Asked of Every Presidential Candidate


Exactly three weeks from today, Fox will be hosting the first of nine GOP Presidential debates (Democrats have yet to settle on a debate schedule). While everyone is busy questioning Fox’s right to choose which of the 16 declared GOP candidates makes the cut (debate performances should decide the polls, not the other way around), no one seems to be discussing the TOPICS they should be asked about. Should we build on the Obama Administration’s efforts to undo the disastrous policies of the Bush Administration or return to them? Now that the GOP has alienated every non-white demographic there is, what positions do they think will lead to their recapturing the White House? Every election season, Republicans only ask the questions they think matter to Republicans (“Elvis or Johnny Cash?”), and Democrats only ask the questions they think matter to Democrats (“Obama & Flag-pin gate“). So while Republicans this year are asked about “BenghaziTM” and “repealing ObamaCare”, Democrats are asked questions about their support for the removal of the Confederate flag from Public grounds. Then, once the two (three?) candidates face off in the cross-Party debates, the subjects that matter most to most Americans haven’t even been brought up yet. They’ll dance around the issues, do their best to avoid giving straight answers, and in the end, the need to “move on before the next debate” will ensure those questions are never answered.

Below is a short list of the 10 12 15 questions I believe should be asked of every presidential candidate this cycle (no dumb questions like: “Name your favorite Supreme Court justice?”):

  1. The War in Afghanistan, which is about to begin its 15th year… almost as long as World War II and Vietnam put together… how will we know when the war there is over? How do you see that result being brought about?

  3. Do you believe in Man-Made Climate Change? If so, do you believe Man is the leading contributor, and what… if anything… should be done about it?

  5. Do you support the right of gay couples to marry? If not, do you support a Constitutional Amendment to ban it?

  7. Do you believe “in-person” voter fraud (the kind “Voter ID” laws are intended to thwart) is a problem in this country? And if so, do you believe the risk of disenfranchising tens of thousands of eligible voters is offset by the number of “ineligible” voters who are stopped?

  9. Do you believe if we shut down every abortion clinic in the country, women would simply stop having abortions?

  11. Describe in detail your plan for Immigration Reform.

  13. How do you account for the widening gap in “income inequality” over the past 30 years?

  15. During the 2004 presidential race, the nominees Bush & Kerry agreed that “a nuclear armed Iran” was the most serious threat facing our nation. During the 2008 race, Senator McCain joked how he’d “Bomb, bomb, bomb Iran” if they didn’t halt their nuclear ambitions. How do you explain the apparent disconnect between the looming “immediate” threat of a nuclear-armed Iran and the fact that such fears are now in their 12th year?

  17. Do you support a path to “legal status” for the over 10 million undocumented immigrants already in the country illegally? If not, what is your solution?

  19. What lessons have you learned from the decision to invade Iraq in 2003? Do you believe the chaos currently inhabiting that region can be traced back to that decision?

  21. Do you believe we need to repeal The Affordable Care Act, ie: “ObamaCare”, and if so, what is your solution to providing care to the 50 million people who now have insurance as a direct result of the law?

  23. Do you support or oppose a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines like the ones used in the Aurora, CO theater shooting, the Giffords campaign shooting in Tuscon, AZ and the massacre of twenty 1st graders and six adults in Newtown, CT?

  25. Which do you believe costs the American Taxpayer more each year: Food Stamps or subsidies to major corporations?

  27. JUST FOUR of the largest banks in the U.S. (thanks to mergers & acquisitions following the 2008 crash) control more than a third… nearly $7.5-TRILLION… of the U.S. economy. Propose a solution to prevent another $700 Billion dollar bailout of Wall Street.

  29. Should corporations that move their operations overseas to avoid paying income taxes be allowed to import their goods back into the United States tax free?

That’s just off the top of my head. I’m sure you can think of some more. Add your own questions for the candidates in the Comments.

Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



July 13, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Election, Politics

What the “Trump Bump” tells us about today’s GOP


Two weeks ago (June 16th), “dead rat toupee enthusiast” Donald Trump officially announced his candidacy for the GOP presidential nomination before a crowd of paid-to-cheer casting extras in one of the most offensive, bigoted, dystopic announcement speeches since Strom Thurmond ran for president in 1948 as the “States Rights” Party (sound familiar) nominee vowing to fight efforts to end segregation. The week before Trump’s big announcement, he stood at 4% support among GOP primary voters, just between Chris Christie (4.8%) and Rick Perry (3.0%). Five days later, a Fox “news” poll shows him in second place at 11%, just below Jeb “what’s-my-last-name?” Bush (15%). Lest you believe it was simply the standard “post-announcement bounce” EVERY candidate enjoys (as one person tweeted me), Christie & Jindal both also announced last week. Christie fell from 4% to 3.8% following his announcement and Jindal… who still polls 50% lower than the margin of error… saw a “bump” from 1.2% to 1.3% (ibid). “Trump’s Bump” is (was?) not some “hmm, let’s hear him out” sudden mild rise in interest, this is cheering enthusiastic support as a DIRECT result of his offensive race-baiting speech. And that speaks volumes about who his supporters are.

When other mega-corporations, from Univision to Macy’s… all who cater to a large minority population… started to sever ties with the real estate mogul, Trump did what any offensive deluded bigot with no self-awareness would do, he doubled-down. During a national news talk program, when asked specifically about calling Mexican immigrants “rapists”, Trump’s response was Somebody is doing the raping!” Can’t be white guys, and it’s impolitic to accuse “the blacks” (that love him so), so it MUST be the Mexicans. They’re all that’s left. Since race has little-to-nothing to do with how likely a person is to be a rapist, such statistics are typically not tallied, but in the last report for which we do have data… a survey conducted in 1995 (pdf):

56% of arrestees for rape in 1995 were white, 42% were black, and 2% were of other races. White arrestees accounted for a substantially larger share of those arrested for other sex offenses, composing 75% of those arrested for these types of offenses in 1995. (ibid)

Somebody is doing the raping!” It must be the “illegals”. Actually, 47% of victims are raped by someone they know, making it less likely to be someone that entered the country recently.

But why the sudden concern for “raping”? Are rapes suddenly on the rise to the point it has become a presidential campaign issue? If Wiki can be trusted, between 2003 & 2010, reported incidents of rape have declined from 32.2% to 27.3%, including a 0.1% uptick in 2004 and the greatest decline from 2009 to 2010 (and “reporting” has gone up not down over the last 20 years, so it’s not that.)

So why is Trump suddenly decrying “Mexican rapists”? Because he knows his audience, that’s why. And clearly, it worked.

Of course, Trump didn’t just complain about Mexican “rapists”. According to him, they’re “drug dealers” and “murderers” too. Setting aside for a moment that the most egregious & lethal drug dealers in this country are the billion dollar pharmaceutical companies with a network of licensed pushers around the country (you call them “doctors”) that’ll dispense 100% legal narcotics so long as they have a brand name stamped on them (like “Pfizer”), in fact, if you are white and middle-class, you are seven times more likely to use drugs yet less likely to go to prison.

Even if we give Trump the benefit of the doubt and claim all those poor white folks are victims of Mexican pushers (and if there is one thing we’ve learned over the years, it’s how deep “white victimhood” runs in GOP-Land), there is almost no way for him to know statistics regarding the race of Drug Dealers because it is not widely reported. We DO know however that if you’re a white drug dealer, you’re more likely to get off. More people of any particular race being arrested does not necessarily mean more of them are actually committing crime, they are just more likely to be found guilty (by juries that… by simple math… are more likely to be white.)

Ditto for murderers.

It bothers me that after becoming The Birther King, demanding to see the birth certificate of the nations first black president, Trump wasn’t called out for his blatant racism, and NBC continued to carry his “reality” TV show for five more seasons, only to suddenly be “Shocked! Shocked!” by Trump’s comments about Mexicans years later.

There is no statistical data to support Trump’s racist claims. If the numbers were on his side, one could at least argue he was simply stating a documented fact. He isn’t. He’s doing what all racists do and that’s make a broad generalization about a group of people that makes him feel “oogy” because he knows his audience… an entire sub-class of low-information racists looking for someone to blame for the “hellhole” they have been told America has become (a place where unemployment “really isn’t” 5.3%, the National Debt is over $22-Trillion and ISIS is hosting gay weddings in an abandoned North Texas Wal*Mart.)

(UPDATE 1: 12 More notorious racist Trump comments.)

(UPDATE 2: Trump says the “initial” response to his comments were “overwhelmingly positive” and he received “numerous calls & letters of congratulations”… only making my point.)

(UPDATE 3 – 7/17/15: Trump now leads the GOP field at 18%, ahead of long-time leaders Walker & Bush, up 7% in just one week. Adding credence to my claims that Republican’s embrace a “victim” mentality and “persecution” complex, rallying around a guy they now perceive as a “victim” of the Media.)

Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



July 6, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Election, myth busting, Partisanship, Politics, Racism, Right-Wing Insanity

Beginning of the End for Religious Bigotry Laws


Last weeks’ historic Supreme Court ruling declaring no legal basis to justify discrimination against Same-Sex couples was condemned by every single GOP presidential hopeful (sans Rand Paul who has a history of waiting to test the political mood before commenting on controversial issues) as being in violation of “religious liberty” laws protecting the right of bigots to be bigots. But in fact, the Supreme Court did NOT rule on so-called “Religious Freedom” laws passed in individual states. They only ruled on the rights of the targets of those laws… and even then… only a very specific subsection. However it is clear that they will have to (sooner rather than later) rule on the Constitutionality of such laws. It’s not just the baker that refuses to bake a “gay” wedding cake, or the caterer who refuses to cater a gay wedding, it’s also the County Clerk who refuses to issue marriage licenses to gay couples (Huckabee asserted this right yesterday on ABC’s ThisWeek), or the pharmacist who refuses to fill your prescription for Birth Control pills because it offends his/her religious sensibilities. If an employee cites “religious grounds” as the reason they can’t fulfill the duties of their job, then can their employer then fire them for not doing the job for which they were hired? What about refusing to hire someone if you think their religion might prevent them from doing their job? (that “pharmacist” link includes a response from CVS declaring their right to do just that.) Then, does the employer get sued for religious discrimination or violating their former employees’ Religious Freedom?

These attempts by individual states to circumvent the U.S. Supreme Court WILL eventually be challenged in the courts and They. Will. Lose. This nation fought a Civil War over whether or not Federal law superseded “states rights” (“The South” lost BTW, and Federal Law reigns supreme.) The Federal government passed a law banning Slavery, and the South would have to abide by it. (How ironic that we also saw a fight over the Confederate flag this past week as the EXACT SAME anti-federal government Southern bigots talk of “secession”, “armed revolt” and “states rights” by morons oblivious to the 150th anniversary of the end of the Civil War that just came to pass last April.)

We’ve had “equal housing” laws in this country since President Lyndon Johnson signed the “Fair Housing” Act into law in 1968. It was intended to protect African-Americans from being discriminated against when seeking housing, but over the years it has been expanded to prohibit discrimination against ANYONE for almost any reason. The Reagan Administration added the “Disabled” to the Act in 1988. So what happens now if someone tries to deny housing to a gay couple citing their “religious freedom” as their justification? How would that be any different than denying an inter-racial couple for the same reason? (Note: Justice Thomas, who voted in favor of allowing people to discriminate against marriages they object to on religious grounds, himself has an interracial marriage.)

The High Court will be *forced* to step in, and I can’t see how they could side against an employers right to fire someone who refuses do the job for which they were hired. An employee could cite “religious reasons” for everything from showing up late to work to drinking on the job, then what? The days of these nonsense “religious freedom” laws are now numbered. It’s inevitable. That case will go to the Supreme Court and those laws will be struck down. You have a right to worship as you wish in your personal life, but NOT “on the job”.

Such a case will pit “Big Business Conservatives” against “Religious Right Conservatives.” Get the popcorn.


Sen. Sanders discusses his record on Civil Rights (1:40)

Bernie responds to Hillary Clinton’s reported 91% to 3% lead among minority voters. Hillary comes in with a built-in advantage of minority support for her husband, while Sanders is still a relative unknown. Bernie talks about a life dedicated to Civil Rights, getting arrested in the 60’s protesting Segregation and marching with Martin Luther King Jr. (but left out the fact he witnessed King’s “I Have a Dream” speech in-person.)


Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



June 29, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Civil Rights, Partisanship, Predictions, Religion, Seems Obvious to Me, Unconstitutional

Let’s Face Facts: Spike in violence against Blacks tied to Right Wing hostility toward Obama


After news broke of the mass murder of nine African-American members of the AME Church of Charleston, SC last Thursday, the “discovery” that the shooter was a Confederate Flag waving racist gun nut, surprised no one. What WAS surprising was the lengths to which Fox “news” went to to suggest that this might have been an attack on Christians by a possibly “liberal” youth driven to hatred of “religion” by The Left rather than a racially motivated crime driven by hatred towards blacks. And the impetus is obvious: the Shooter shares much in common with Fox’s core demographic: White Southern Conservative, loves guns, with some obviously racist views. Yes, the Right was openly suggesting this redneck jackass was not necessarily motivated by racism but by hatred of religion. And we all know why: Because one view makes Conservatives look bad while the other makes “Libruls” look bad. It has become political. And why might that be? We all KNOW why but it seems like no one is willing to admit it: Open hostility towards President Obama is feeding open hostility towards blacks in general. Trying to attach a political ideology to the S.C. shooter wouldn’t be necessary if there wasn’t already a reason to believe politics played a role in this latest mass murder. Think about it.

I mean, seriously. If “politics” played “No” part in shaping the motivations of the S.C. Shooter, then it wouldn’t matter if he were a Conservative, a Liberal, a Communist or an anarchist. The very fact Fox tried to shed doubt on the motivations of the shooter is (frankly) an ADMISSION that politics likely played a part in this crime.

A string of unarmed black people… several of them children for Christ sakes (Tamir Rice, Travon Martin and a bikini-clad black girl in McKinney, Texas) have been assaulted (or worse) by enraged white authority figures (numerous cops and two wannabees) that can’t fathom the idea of relating or even empathizing with blacks as equals that might make them less quick to draw their gun or wrestle a black person to the ground. And I can only attribute this to one thing: a lack of respect for our Commander-in-Chief, often couched in the subtle language of racism.

When a fight between two mostly white rival biker gangs broke out in Waco last month, police sat with the bikers and calmly arrested them. How many in the media called them “thugs” and questioned why “leaders of the biking community” hadn’t come out to “condemn” these rogue elements? “Where are the parents?” A biker jacket on a white guy is apparently less anti-social than a “hoodie” on a black kid.

A Facebook page of the shooter turned up with photos (video?) of him flying “White Power” & “Confederate battle” flags as well as photos of him burning the American flag. The day of the shooting, we already had photos of him in a jacket sporting the “Apartheid-era” flags of South Africa and Rhodesia (modern-day Zimbabwe) with a novelty Confederate flag license plate on the front of his car. If you’ve seen the photos, The Shooter is clearly in the woods, unquestionably nowhere near the downtown area. And yet, Fox “news” would have you believe this poor misguided (by Liberal hated of Christianity) God-fearing youth with a healthy love of guns (which in itself doesn’t gibe with the “Liberal” label) couldn’t find a church closer to his home and apparently had to drive 15-20 miles into the heart of downtown Charleston, where he just happened to choose an almost exclusively black church “by accident” so he may start killing “Christians”.

Seriously. Did Fox really believe the downtown Charleston AME church “just happened” to be the most convenient church to where the shooter lived? There weren’t dozens more churches along the way in which he could have stopped in to carry out his brutal Liberal-influenced attack on Christianity? Anyone that buys that desperate stretch of tortured logic is lying to themselves… and knows it.

I forget who said it yesterday (during the Sunday shows), but “guns make the weak feel powerful”. We now have an entire network dedicated to convincing people they are victims, and that the Federal government is their enemy. They already horde guns like a squirrel hording nuts for Winter, and the NRA makes Bank convincing the paranoid that the government is coming to take their guns away. With a mostly white Southern Conservative demographic that (unquestionably) already tends to lean a bit racist to begin with, linking their dislike of “blacks” to their dislike of “government” has become painfully easy now that the head of that government just happens to be black.

The S.C. Shooter told one black woman in the AME church that “[blacks] are taking over the country“. Now if you believe a 20-year old kid is upset over losing a string of jobs or college admission to “Affirmative Action” candidates, or had one-too-many black bankers turn him down for a loan, you’re sniffing glue. No, there is only ONE “black” in this kid’s mind that epitomizes having “taken over the country”, and that’s President Obama.

Nightly Show on Fox whitewashing of Charelston shooting


I’ve often said that “if a Conservative accuses you of doing something, it’s only because they’ve either done it themselves or thought of doing it and assume you’re every bit as devious as they are”, be it “election rigging” or “false flag” operations. Trust me.

And that second one, that belief that everything that makes Conservatives look bad is in fact a “false flag” operation meticulously carried out by “The Other Side” is actually a thing. In any other era, these candidates for the rubber room would be holding meetings in basements to discuss the fact the U.S. military is hiding alien bodies in a hangar in “Area-51”. Instead, these delusional paranoids have their own 24 hour cable news network that tells them, “No, you’re not paranoid! The government really is building FEMA interment camps where they plan to hold you prisoner for… well, that’s really not clear. Till you agree to give up your guns and sign up for socialized medicine? I seriously can not come up with a SANE explanation for why the Federal government might suddenly be building (“in total secret” mind you) internment camps to house hundreds/thousands/millions(?) of Americans or planning an invasion of Texas via secret underground passages in vacant Wal*Marts. For how long and what purpose? There’s not enough tinfoil in the world to explain that one.

But one thing is brutally clear, latent Conservative racism is being linked and stoked towards President Obama specifically and that racial animosity is bleeding over into the general population.

Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



June 22, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Crime, Guns & Violence, myth busting, Party of Life, Politics, Racism, Rants, Religion, Seems Obvious to Me, Terrorism

STUNNING VIDEO: Iraqi soldiers say if US sends more troops, “We’ll fight them too!”


Iraqi soldiers: “If Obama sends more troops to fight ISIS, we’ll fight ISIS AND the Americans!” (2:48)

The full clip shows what a chaotic mess Iraq has become since the 2003 invasion. Not just from the constant fighting, but with the rise of Islamic militancy (women completely covered, schools closed, Christians threatened). America turned Iraq into this mess, and in Iraq, the thought of more American troops returning to reoccupy their country would be about as welcome as Dick Cheney at the DNC Convention. (Key section begins at the 2:05 mark.)

The latest entry into the GOP Presidential Clown Car, Sen. Lindsey Graham, is one of the few people left on Earth who still believes invading Iraq wasn’t a mistake (though he concedes in retrospect that if it were 2003, he “probably” wouldn’t support the 2003 invasion), and everything was going just great until Obama took over. He, and about a dozen other GOP contenders have all criticized President Obama for (standing by President Bush’s “Status of Forces Agreement” regarding) pulling our troops out of Iraq “too soon.” I’ve written about this absurd rewrite of history on several occasions (ibid), pointing out the fact that “Yes, technically, President Obama could have ignored the SoFA agreed to with the “sovereign” Iraqi government (remember when that was a big deal?) and just kept thousands of American troops there against the Iraqi’s wishes, but there is a reason President Bush agreed not to. Part of the agreement to let them stay was on the condition that American troops be shielded from prosecution for past “crimes”. The Iraqi’s said, “No. And if an American soldier accused of crimes is spotted on the streets, he/she will be arrested and put on trial before an Iraqi court.” So, President Bush agreed to pull out ALL troops “by the end of 2011.” President Obama abided by this agreement to the letter.

Now, just imagine if President Obama HADN’T withdrawn American troops from Iraq, only to have an American soldier turn up on TV, standing trial before an Iraqi court, forced to account for American atrocities against the Iraqi people (and there are many.) “This is how Obama ‘Supports the Troops!'”, they’d cry. “Shameful!”, “This wouldn’t have happened if only he had pulled our troops out like President Bush had so wisely agreed to do before leaving office!”, they’d shout in protest.

Graham isn’t the only warhawk calling to resend American combat troops back to Iraq (though he is the only one specifying an exact number of “10,000”) where they aren’t wanted (and keep them there “indefinitely“). Former NY Gov George Pataki and current Ohio Governor John Kasich both want to send an unspecified number of American troops into Iraq “right now”, and now that’s his handlers have finally told him how he is supposed to feel about the decision to invade Iraq in the first place, Jeb Bush is noncommittal on whether or not we should send more troops back into Iraq (if he didn’t, he’d be the first President Bush NOT to invade Iraq, so there’s THAT), but his assertion that “Obama refused to sign a plan to leave 10,000 troops in Iraq”, rated only one step above “Pants-On-Fire” on Another GOP noncommittal commitment from Gov. Chris Christie, The Pompous One probably didn’t do himself any favors yesterday by using President Bush’s ridiculous “Coalition of the Willing” catch-phrase to describe his plan for securing Iraq. Chuck Norris’ favorite candidate, Mike Huckabee won’t say what he thinks Obama should do about Iraq, only to suggest that no one should join the military until after we’ve replaced Obama with a Republican Commander-in-Chief… where U.S. troops had a mortality rate that made a street-fight between the Crips & Bloods look like a stroll down the Champs d’Elysees.

Neither Gov. Scott Walker nor Hillary Clinton are willing to commit to whether or not they’d send troops back into Iraq, while youngster Marco Rubio… having perhaps watched one-too-many commando movies… thinks we can wipe out the whole lot of them by sending in a Special Forces Unit… which is essentially Donald Rumsfeld’s “small footprint” strategy that led to the disaster in Iraq in the first place.

Troops in Iraq say how they really feel about Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld (July 15, 2003)


But hey, as Rummy noted:

“Death has a tendency to encourage a depressing view of war.” – Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld – date unknown


Iraq is a mess. And it is impossible to fathom how sending in more troops into a place where they are not wanted… even by the people they are being sent there to help… would make things better. No one ever becomes more welcoming of you after you stick a gun in their face, kill their father/mother/brother/sister and turn their once peaceful & functioning nation into a basket case. Many Iraqi’s still hold hatred for all Americans simply for what we did to their country, and would welcome another opportunity to kill American soldiers. And that anger won’t go away simply because we are helping them fight ISIS… an enemy that wouldn’t exist had we not invaded in the first place. All of the GOP candidates… sans Rand Paul… seem to think sending troops back into Iraq is a great idea, and Hillary Clinton is the only Democratic candidate that has yet to come out against it. In the first video at the top of the page, the Iraqi soldiers still fighting consider American troops their enemy, while the lone former Iraqi solder… who hadn’t been paid in seven months and quickly decided it wasn’t worth risking HIS life to keep fighting ISIS… would like American troops to return to do the fighting for him.

And this is where we are. The decision whether or not to send American troops back into Iraq isn’t as cut & dry as most of the GOP candidates would have you believe. There is a VERY good chance they might be attacked from BOTH sides.

And I still don’t hear anyone proposing a NON-military solution to ending our wars in the Middle East (possibly Lincoln Chafee, but I can’t confirm). If all it took was sending in troops, the war would have ended 15 years ago.

Writers Wanted Got something to say? Mugsy’s Rap Sheet is always looking for article submissions to focus on the stories we may miss each week. To volunteer your own Op/Ed for inclusion here, send us an email with an example of your writing skills & choice of topic, and maybe we’ll put you online!

RSS Please REGISTER to be notified by e-mail every time this Blog is updated! Firefox/IE users can use RSS for a browser link that lists the latest posts! RSS



June 15, 2015 · Admin Mugsy · No Comments - Add
Posted in: Election, Middle East, National Security, Politics, rewriting history, Right-Wing Insanity, Terrorism, War