I will not be posting for approximately three months as I will be away from home with very limited access to the internet. Comments will be locked during this period.
Archive for June, 2010
Will not be posting
June 19, 2010Catching Hell: The National Rifle Association
June 18, 2010The National Rifle Association has been catching some serious hell as of late. While that is nothing new? Where the incoming fire is coming from is. It has been from people such as myself, a Life Member, and others that make up this organization.
Don’t get me wrong. The NRA has done a lot for gun owners over the years. Most training and safety involving firearms has roots in the NRA, and that surely is a good thing. However, politically the NRA has for many years taken the easy route. Deal cutting may be the way that things are done in the beltway, but on the range there are no excuses for acting in an irresponsible manner.
Simply put, the NRA has been a pig with lipstick that fly’s for quite some time, and the membership is more than a bit fed up with that. What follows is a follow up from Gun Owners of America, and then my “personal” response about my complaint from NRA / ILA. I will leave it to my readership to read the tea leaves as it were…
Threat to Free Speech Lights a Fire in the Grassroots
— Vote has been temporarily postponed; keep up the heat!
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
www.gunowners.org
“[T]he NRA — on whose board of directors I serve — rather than holding steadfastly to its historic principles of defending the Constitution and continuing its noble fight against government regulation of political speech instead opted for a political deal borne of self-interest in exchange for ‘neutrality’ from the legislation’s requirements.”
— NRA Director Cleta Mitchell, June 17, 2010
Thursday, June 17, 2010
The above quote — part of an editorial authored by NRA Director Cleta Mitchell — ran in The Washington Post today.
Like Mitchell, bloggers and editorial writers around the country have lit up the Internet with the story that we have been alerting you to over the past 48 hours. Here are just some of the headlines:
* “The NRA sells out to Democrats on the First Amendment,” The Wall Street Journal
* “Conservatives take on the NRA over deal on disclosure bill,” The Washington Post
* “The National Rifle Association’s Excuse Holds No Water,” RedState.org
The conservative movement (and to be honest, many liberal organizations as well) are coming together to loudly protest the DISCLOSE Act — legislation that threatens to gag our ability to effectively hold individual congressmen accountable in the days and weeks leading up to an election.
It is imperative that we continue hammering the Congress. But rather than cry “uncle,” liberal Democrats are now trying to buy off more groups with an exemption for those that have at least 500,000 members (rather than the higher threshold of one million, which would have applied to few groups other than the NRA).
Of course, how is the government going to know how many members an organization has? According to the legislation, each organization will have to certify to a government commission how many members they have. But what if the commission wants documentation; will the organization have to “disclose” the names of their members?
GOA, of course, will never do this. Furthermore, you should know that your Gun Owners of America can NOT be bought off. We will continue opposing this bill on principle, urging all gun groups to stick together in this fight. As we stated yesterday, we realize that: “We must all hang together, or we will all hang separately.”
GOA applauds NRA Director Cleta Mitchell for the courageous stand she took today. (You can read her editorial here.) We hope that the NRA leadership will heed her wisdom and take a stand against this bill. If they don’t, we wouldn’t be surprised if NRA members start demanding a change in their leadership. After all, the NRA has engaged in many good fights over the years, and it would be a shame to lose this VERY IMPORTANT battle because high-ranking staff led the NRA down the wrong path.
ACTION:
1. Please call your congressman today and urge him or her to oppose HR 5175. We’ve asked you to send emails before, but now on the eve before the vote, it is crucial that the phones ring off the hook. If they’re not ringing, they won’t be worried.
You can use the Talking Points below to call your Representative toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.
2. If you haven’t yet urged the NRA staff to change its position on HR 5175 and stand with Gun Owners of America, please do so. NRA Director Cleta Mitchell was absolutely correct, and the NRA leadership should heed her wisdom. You can call the NRA at (800) 392-VOTE (8683).
3. Please help Gun Owners of America to continue fighting for your rights. You can go to http://gunowners.org/contribute-to-goa.htm to help us alert as many people as possible to the DISCLOSE Act threat.
—– Talking Points for contacting your Representative —–
1. I stand with Gun Owners of America in opposing the DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175).
2. The Bill of Rights is clear in saying that Congress has no authority to pass legislation like this. Just like the Second Amendment says our gun rights “shall not be infringed,” the First Amendment says “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech.”
3. The Supreme Court was right earlier this year in the Citizens United case. Sen. John McCain — the author of the Campaign Finance Reform law (otherwise known as the Incumbent Protection Act) — was wrong. Americans, and the groups they choose to associate with, should be able to criticize Congress in the days and weeks leading up to an election WITHOUT BEING GAGGED OR FORCED TO JUMP THROUGH HOOPS that are mandated by Congress.
This is the baffle them with bull pucky response that I recieved from the NRA;
We appreciate some NRA members’ concerns about our position on H.R. 5175, the “DISCLOSE Act.” Unfortunately, critics of our position have misstated or misunderstood the facts. We have never said we would support any version of this bill. To the contrary, we clearly stated NRA’s strong opposition to the DISCLOSE Act (as introduced) in a letter sent to Members of Congress on May 26. Through the courts and in Congress, the NRA has consistently and strongly opposed any effort to restrict the rights of our four million members to speak and have their voices heard on behalf of gun owners nationwide. The initial version of H.R. 5175 would effectively have put a gag order on the NRA during elections and threatened our members’ freedom of association, by forcing us to turn our donor lists over to the federal government. We would also have been forced to list our top donors on all election-related television, radio and Internet ads and mailings—even mailings to our own members. We refuse to let this Congress impose those unconstitutional restrictions on our Association. The NRA provides critical firearms training for our Armed Forces and law enforcement throughout the country. This bill would force us to choose between training our men and women in uniform and exercising our right to free political speech. We refuse to let this Congress force us to make that choice. Is it worth us having to live with this bill’s draconian restrictions just to protect the First Amendment rights of other groups? We don’t think so. We didn’t “sell out” to Nancy Pelosi or anyone else. We told Congress we opposed the bill. As a result, congressional leaders made a commitment to exempt us from its draconian restrictions on free speech. If that commitment is honored, we will not be involved in the final House debate. If that commitment is not fully honored, we will strongly oppose the bill. Our position is based on principle and experience. During consideration of the previous campaign finance legislation passed in 2002, congressional leadership repeatedly refused to exempt the NRA from its provisions, promising that our concerns would be fixed somewhere down the line. That didn't happen; instead, the NRA had to live under those restrictions for seven years and spend millions of dollars on compliance costs and on legal fees to challenge the law. We will not go down that road again when we have an opportunity to protect our ability to speak. There are those who say the NRA has a greater duty to principle than to gun rights. It’s easy to say we should put the Second Amendment at risk over some so-called First Amendment principle – unless you have a sworn duty to protect the Second Amendment above all else, as we do. The NRA is a bipartisan, single-issue organization made up of millions of individual members dedicated to the protection of the Second Amendment. We do not represent the interests of other organizations. That's their responsibility. Our responsibility is to protect and defend the interests of our members. Best regards, NRA-ILA Grassroots Division _________________ Lipstick on a pig...
The very angry Tea Party: That’s putting it mildly
June 17, 2010The people that make up the Taxed Enough Already Party are indeed very angry. For a variety of reasons.
“The seething anger that seems to be an indigenous aspect of the Tea Party movement arises, I think, at the very place where politics and metaphysics meet, where metaphysical sentiment becomes political belief. More than their political ideas, it is the anger of Tea Party members that is already reshaping our political landscape. As Jeff Zeleny reported last Monday in The Times, the vast majority of House Democrats are now avoiding holding town-hall-style forums — just as you might sidestep an enraged, jilted lover on a subway platform — out of fear of confronting the incubus of Tea Party rage that routed last summer’s meetings. This fear-driven avoidance is, Zeleny stated, bringing the time-honored tradition of the political meeting to the brink of extinction.”
One would think that those politicians would get the message. Rather than that, they are coming up with all sorts of excuses for not listening to the American people. Afraid of a little tar and feathering perhaps?
“In his brilliant exposition of why sweeping policy changes often have unintended consequences, the late sociologist Robert K. Merton wrote that leaders get things wrong when their “paramount concern with the foreseen immediate consequences excludes the consideration of further or other consequences” of their proposals. This leads policy makers to assert things that are false, wishing them to be true.
Which brings us to President Obama’s many claims about his health-care reform. Take his oft-expressed statement that if you like the coverage you have, you can keep it. That sounds good—but perverse incentives in his new law will cause most Americans to lose their existing insurance.”
Full Story HERE and it is more than simply another case of unintended consequences…
How’s the ECONOMY working out for you obamanites?
NRA sells out the people of America:Statement From The National Rifle Association On H.R. 5175, The Disclose Act
June 16, 2010After spending close to half an hour on hold I was finally able to speak to an NRA rep. at NRA / ILA. I received the usual lip service, and was told that my comments would be passed on…What follows is the limp wristed defense of their actions that landed in my email inbox this morning. This is just another example of the NRA selling out, again…
Statement From The National Rifle
Association On H.R. 5175, The Disclose Act
The National Rifle Association believes that any restrictions on the political speech of Americans are unconstitutional.
In the past, through the courts and in Congress, the NRA has opposed any effort to restrict the rights of its four million members to speak and have their voices heard on behalf of gun owners nationwide.
The NRA’s opposition to restrictions on political speech includes its May 26, 2010 letter to Members of Congress expressing strong concerns about H.R. 5175, the DISCLOSE Act. As it stood at the time of that letter, the measure would have undermined or obliterated virtually all of the NRA’s right to free political speech and, therefore, jeopardized the Second Amendment rights of every law-abiding American.
The most potent defense of the Second Amendment requires the most adamant exercise of the First Amendment. The NRA stands absolutely obligated to its members to ensure maximum access to the First Amendment, in order to protect and preserve the freedom of the Second Amendment.
The NRA must preserve its ability to speak. It cannot risk a strategy that would deny its rights, for the Second Amendment cannot be defended without them.
Thus, the NRA’s first obligation must be to its members and to its most ardent defense of firearms freedom for America’s lawful gun owners.
On June 14, 2010, Democratic leadership in the U.S. House of Representatives pledged that H.R. 5175 would be amended to exempt groups like the NRA, that meet certain criteria, from its onerous restrictions on political speech. As a result, and as long as that remains the case, the NRA will not be involved in final consideration of the House bill.
The NRA cannot defend the Second Amendment from the attacks we face in the local, state, federal, international and judicial arenas without the ability to speak. We will not allow ourselves to be silenced while the national news media, politicians and others are allowed to attack us freely.
The NRA will continue to fight for its right to speak out in defense of the Second Amendment. Any efforts to silence the political speech of NRA members will, as has been the case in the past, be met with strong opposition.
And this is what GOA has to say about this issue;
House Democrats Close to Reinstituting Penalties for Criticizing Congress
— Help GOA get other pro-gun groups on board in this fight
— Help GOA get other pro-gun groups on board in this fight
Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
We alerted you last week to the very dangerous DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175), where liberal House Democrats are trying to gag their political opponents.
Well, there have been some late-breaking developments in the fight to kill this bill, but you’re not going to believe what’s happening. This is what Politico.com reported yesterday:
House Democrats have offered to exempt the National Rifle Association from a sweeping campaign-finance bill, removing a major obstacle in the push to roll back the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling.
The NRA had objected to some of the strict financial disclosure provisions that Democrats have proposed for corporations and politically active nonprofits and that had kept moderate, pro-gun Democrats from backing the legislation.
But if the NRA signs off on the deal, the bill could come to the House floor as early as this week. The NRA said it would not comment until specific legislative language is revealed.
An NRA official also noted that the group would not be supporting the bill but would not actively oppose it if the deal with the Democratic leadership holds up.
So if the NRA gets an exemption for itself, it will not oppose the anti-freedom DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175). This legislation is designed to overturn major parts of the recent Supreme Court decision which restored the ability of groups like GOA to freely criticize elected officials during a campaign.
But the NRA would no longer oppose the bill once they’ve won an exemption for themselves. As reported by Politico.com:
The legislation in question is designed to restore more campaign finance rules in the wake of last year’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, which removed prohibitions on corporations and unions running TV ads opposing or backing candidates in the run-up to an election.
Democratic leaders fear the Citizens United decision could open the floodgates for corporate money to flow into this year’s midterm elections, which they believe would favor Republican interests.
The legislation, offered by Maryland Rep. Chris Van Hollen, chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, would require special-interest groups to disclose their top donors if they choose to run TV ads or send out mass mailings in the final months of an election.
In addition to benefiting the NRA, this “exemption” amendment will benefit Blue Dog Democrats who will be given a green light to support the Obama-Pelosi backed bill:
Democrats are justifying the NRA exemption, saying the organization has a long history of being involved in the political process, and they say the real goal of the new campaign finance bill is to expose corporations and unions that create ambiguous front groups to run attack ads during campaigns. Unions would not be allowed to use the NRA exemption.
North Carolina Rep. Heath Shuler, an NRA backer and conservative Democrat, proved to be pivotal to the NRA deal. Shuler was the first to offer an amendment to exempt the NRA and other nonprofits from the legislation, but that move drew objections from campaign watchdog groups.
“There were a number of concerns that the DISCLOSE Act could hinder or penalize the efforts of certain long-standing, member-driven organizations who have historically acted in good faith,” Shuler said, referring to the NRA. “Most of those concerns are addressed within the manager’s amendment.”
But here’s the rub, the special exemption amendment will ONLY benefit the NRA and no other groups whatsoever. It will leave all other groups who are currently in Obama’s crosshairs dangling in the wind:
The proposal would exempt organizations that have more than 1 million members, have been in existence for more than 10 years, have members in all 50 states and raise 15 percent or less of their funds from corporations. Democrats say the new language would apply to only the NRA, since no other organization would qualify under these specific provisions. The NRA, with 4 million members, will not actively oppose the DISCLOSE Act, according to Democratic sources.
The exemption for a huge group like the NRA is sure to outrage smaller special-interest groups [like Gun Owners of America].
We are in a political war, and our opponents are trying to change the rules of the game by gagging those groups that are their political enemies. Some might say that the requirement to disclose our membership is not a gag rule, but it most certainly is. Gun Owners of America will NOT do anything that would jeopardize the privacy of our members!
Gun owners know the dangers of being registered, as it has often proven to be the first step towards gun confiscation — which, by the way, is why it’s lamentable that the management of the NRA is selling out its members for the proverbial bowl of pottage. (Go to http://tinyurl.com/2uw9sm9 to see what a leading Capitol Hill blog has written about this sell-out.)
We’re positive that regular members of the NRA would never want this to happen — where all the other pro-gun organizations (like GOA) that are fighting to protect our rights would be gagged, while special favors are cut for one group in particular.
We stand shoulder to shoulder with NRA and all the other pro-gun groups when they are fighting to defend our Second Amendment freedoms. We all have to stick together if we are going to win these battles.
We’re not sure who is making the decisions over at the NRA headquarters… but this type of thing would have never happened in the past, and we’re positive that the NRA membership would not be happy with it. This cannot stand!
ACTION: Please do everything you can to kill this dangerous DISCLOSE Act legislation (HR 5175). Here’s what you can do:
1. Urge your congressman to oppose HR 5175. You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send a pre-written message to your Representative.
2. Call the NRA-ILA at (800) 392-VOTE (8683) and urge them to oppose this legislation and to rate any congressman who votes in favor of HR 5175 as having cast an ANTI-GUN vote. Urge them not to sell out our constitutional freedoms just because they can get an exemption for themselves.
3. Please help Gun Owners of America to continue fighting for your rights. You can go to http://gunowners.org/contribute-to-goa.htm to help us alert as many people as possible to this new threat.
—– Pre-written letter —–
Dear Representative:
I stand with Gun Owners of America in opposing the DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175).
There are reports that a deal may be cut to exempt one large organization from the terms of the DISCLOSE Act. This smacks of the money-for-votes fiasco which helped grease the skids for passage of ObamaCare and which has already lowered Congress’ reputation to unprecedented depths.
On the Senate side, Senator Mitch McConnell blasted this deal, which is aimed at carving out special exemptions for the NRA leadership in exchange for their promise to sit on their hands and not oppose the DISCLOSE Act. “If there is one thing Americans loathe about Washington, it’s the backroom dealing to win the vote of organizations with power and influence at the expense of everyone else,” McConnell said.
“Just as it wasn’t the Democrats’ money to offer in the health care debate, free speech isn’t theirs to ration out to those willing to play ball — it’s a right guaranteed by our First Amendment to all Americans.”
I agree wholeheartedly. Please do NOT vote in favor of this legislation, as it will have a chilling effect upon our free speech rights by forcing the organizations we associate with to disclose their membership lists.
How ironic that a Congress and President who treat transparency with contempt should now be trying to force legal organizations to disclose the names of their law-abiding members. The hypocrisy is blatant, to say the least.
Vote no on HR 5175.
Sincerely,
NRA: Selling out the membership yet again!
June 15, 2010
URGENT ALERT: NRA cuts deals to limit free speech
Three prominent Washington D.C. websites are reporting what many capitol insiders warned of: the National Rifle Association has made a deal with the devil (i.e. anti-gun Democrats Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid) to limit the free speech of Americans in exchange for their carved-out exemption.
While some pro-gun rights advocates may think free speech does not matter or that nothing another gun advocacy group does should ever be questioned, the National Association for Gun Rights and I take a very different view.
Without the right to free speech, we are defenseless in the battle to save our Second Amendment rights.
Let me be clear: restricting our First Amendment rights is the first step to stripping us of our Second Amendment rights, and should be resisted at every turn.
We don’t care who you are or what an organization may have done in the past – we only care about whether your actions will promote or harm our rights.
And frankly, this craven deal by the NRA will damage our gun rights and our free speech rights. After you read up on the facts, I ask you to give the NRA an earful by calling 1-800-672-3888 and insist they renounce the deal with Pelosi and Reid. Believe me, it is not too late if you will get involved.
- http://www.redstate.com/erick/2010/06/14/yet-again-the-nra-sells-out-to-democrats/
- http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0610/38500.html
- http://www.campaignfreedom.org/newsroom/detail/shotgun-sellout-house-democrats-cut-special-deal-with-nra
Though at first objecting to the DISCLOSE Act, which would radically limit the free speech of organizations and thus, gun owners, the NRA has now agreed to an exemption for their organization (and other mammoth, mostly liberal, organizations like AARP and probably Moveon.org) in exchange for support of the Democrats’ bill.
This legislation would place draconian limitations on the ability of organizations to voice their opinions on politicians, and by extension, their legislation. The chilling effect on free speech would be difficult to overstate.
Along with their tacit endorsement of Senator Harry Reid, the NRA is signaling that they trust the Democrats will spare the Second Amendment from further assaults.
But that’s a strategy of appeasement, and to put it bluntly, it’s insane. It just delays the inevitable.
Winston Churchill addressed this strategy when he said “An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.”
Background:
This is not the only time the NRA has cut a deal to harm gun owners and gun rights in the glare of an anti-gun media frenzy.
Just a three years ago, the NRA joined with arch gun-hater Rep. Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY) to pass H.R. 2640, the Veteran’s Disarmament Act. When gun control advocates saw the Virginia Tech shootings as an opportunity to pass gun control, the NRA immediately signed the documents of surrender and actively lobbied Congress to pass legislation that will disarm tens of thousands of Americans, including veterans.
Why did they do that? Frankly, they were more concerned with what the media and Washington power-bosses were saying than their loyal-to-a-fault members.
Similarly in 2004 when, desperate to pass the Firearms Manufacturers’ Lawsuits Protection bill, the NRA dangled a re-authorization of the Clinton Assault Weapons ban in front of hungry politicians. The deal was going to be that if anti-gun politicians voted for the Lawsuit Protection bill, the NRA would not oppose re-authorization of the sun-setting Clinton Gun Ban.
Thankfully, a coalition of groups led by the National Association for Gun Rights joined together to kill that deal by exposing it to the light of honest gun owners across this nation… just like we are doing now. In that fight, after a few weeks of excuses and covering their tracks, the NRA backed off of the deal, the Lawsuit Protection Bill still passed and the Clinton Gun Ban ended.
What can you do?
Tell the NRA you’ve had enough, and urge them to kill the DISCLOSE Act, not cut a deal to pass it. Call them at 1-800-672-3888 today, as it may be too late tomorrow.
The more we learn: epic fail obamacare
June 14, 2010As more and more of the contents of obamacare are exposed it is clear. We warned you, and it’s actually worse… This obomanation shoved down the throats of Americans is being touted by the impostor in chiefs administration and lackey’s as something otherwise. Like a ckeck to seniors that helps cover the “doughnut hole” will make up for all the rest of what is in it.
Those opposed to Democratic health reform still see the issue as a political winner, White House p.r. efforts notwithstanding. House minority leader John Boehner sent out a press release about the newly energized Administration messaging campaign titled “All that Glitters Is Not Sold,” and James Capretta, a former White House staffer during the George W. Bush Administration, is spearheading a website touted by conservative Bill Kristol to counter pro–health care reform messages. Called ObamaCareWatch.org, the site includes commentary and reporting critical of the Affordable Care Act. The opening piece on the website is headlined, “The More We Learn, the Worse It Gets.”
Full Story HERE.
Straw Purchase Felon Michael Bloomberg better get this one correct :)
June 11, 2010The Mayor of New York City had better be looking a bit south and paying some attention to what is happening there. This is a States Rights issue and it really should have been written to cover more issues than firearms. But? West Virginia shines this day. Basking in the bright light of liberty and justice!
Fairfax, Va. — Today Governor Joe Manchin (D) signed NRA-supported Senate Bill 1005 into law in West Virginia. He had vetoed the original version of this bill (SB 515) earlier this year due to a drafting error. Recognizing the importance of this measure, Governor Manchin added SB 515 to his agenda for the 2010 Extraordinary Session and it was renumbered SB 1005. Both bills, introduced by State Senator Jeff Kessler (D-2), will make it a crime to knowingly solicit illegal gun sales and to conduct illegal sting operations like those conducted by New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg.
“I would like to thank Governor Manchin and the West Virginia legislature for taking the necessary steps to prevent these illegal entrapment schemes,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA-ILA. “We hope that governors and legislators around the country follow in Virginia and West Virginia’s footsteps and make this the law of their respective states.”
This measure passed out of the West Virginia House of Delegates on May 14, 2010 and will take effect 90 days from its passage. A similar piece of legislation was signed into law in Virginia in 2007.
“Any elected official who wants to truly have an impact on reducing crime knows that the way to do it is to focus law enforcement resources on prosecuting crime,” concluded Cox. “Our hardworking federal, state and local law enforcement officials should be able to do their jobs without having to worry about out-of-state politicians and their political agendas.”
Winner Of 2010 Sarah Brady Visionary Award
June 11, 2010Well well well. Who would have thought…
On May 18, the Brady Campaign held a big shindig in Washington, D.C., to give this year’s “Sarah Brady Visionary Award” to now-former Hearst News Service White House reporter Helen Thomas.
In accepting the award, Thomas vilified the U.S. Supreme Court for declaring the Second Amendment to protect an individual right to arms, and vilified the Armed Forces for fighting the war on terrorism.
“The inept Supreme Court has found a way for all individuals to have a right to have a gun,” Thomas griped. “No Guns! What planet does the Supreme Court live on? . . . We’re living in an era when we send robots halfway around the world to kill people in their own country, and no one asks why. Let’s never give up hope that we can control deadly guns in this country.”
Before Thomas accepted the award, Brady Campaign president Paul Helmke read a statement from President Obama, who said, “Helen Thomas will always hold special place in my heart.” Sarah Brady called Thomas “the finest journalist of our generation.”
Mrs. Brady may wish to revise and extend her remarks, however. Thomas’s moment of adulation was brought to an abrupt halt on June 7, when Thomas resigned in disgrace for having said that Jews in Israel should go back to Germany or Poland, where, as the world knows, millions of unarmed Jews were imprisoned in concentration camps and, ultimately, murdered by the Nazis.
Mexico: Play the race card… Again?
June 9, 2010This is getting old. Twice in recent days Mexican citizens have been killed in the United States. While the latest incident is still under investigation the previous one involved a man that had been here for many years, and was actually being deported. He became violent, and got tazed. At autopsy he was found to have been acutely intoxicated with methamphetamine. Imagine that? Loud mouth Calderon accused the United States of torture. Go figure…
Now, the Governor of one of the failed nation state Mexico is playing the race card in explaining away what happened during the second incident. Tell me El Presidente, and Governor. How many Americans were killed by your criminals that have come across our borders lately? What sort of lame excuses will you make up about that?
How’s about Mexico just going ahead and openly declaring war? For some strange reason I just don’t see Mexico having the macho intestinal fortitude to do that…
Read the whole story HERE.
And then we have this…
“National Security: A Mexican cartel plots to blow up a dam — in Texas! Another pack of Mexican terrorists takes cash from Hugo Chavez. And what is Washington wringing its hands about? Why, racism in Arizona. If still more proof is needed that the border needs to be secured, the latest threats emerging from Mexico should do the trick. Together, they signal that the country’s war could advance to a more savage stage. … These blood-chilling scenarios aren’t fantasies. They are signs of an emerging threat that gets little attention from U.S. lawmakers. Instead of focusing on making the border secure, they play partisan political games, pandering to potential voting blocs by dangling amnesty in front of illegal immigrants, grandstanding against Arizona’s effort to enforce federal law and coming up with one excuse after another for not erecting a border fence. As illegal armed groups plot to blow up infrastructure even in this country, Democrats in Congress are more concerned about an illegal immigrant getting his feelings hurt if a police officer in Arizona asks him to show some ID.” —Investor’s Business Daily
Ron Micheli for governor endorsed by state sovereignty advocate
June 9, 2010Ron Micheli has picked up the endorsement from former Sheriff Richard Mack a State Sovereignty Advocate.
This comes as most are starting to take notice of Micheli as a solid defender of State Sovereignty, specifically the Tenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
According to a press release from the Micheli campaign-
“The reason I’m supporting Ron is that he understands the issues that really are pertinent to the state of Wyoming, and first and foremost is State sovereignty” – Sheriff Richard Mack
To watch video of Sheriff Mack’s endorsement click here
Conservative Libertarian Outpost 