Archive for the ‘Blogroll’ Category

Remember ObamaCare?

December 8, 2010

GOA had managed to win some minor victories in the fight over this legislation last year.  At that time, the very-liberal Slate magazine lamented that GOA had won a skirmish over ObamaCare:

Score one for the Gun Owners of America, a lobby group positioned well to the right of the National Rifle Association…. [T]o pacify GOA, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid [has inserted into the health care bill] a section titled “Protecting 2nd Amendment Gun Rights” [which prevents the] disclosure or collection of any information relating to gun ownership.  (Slate, December 20, 2009.)

But even after being “cleaned up” for some of its anti-gun problems, the ATF can still use ObamaCare to troll a federal database for your medical information.  It can identify people with common ailments such as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) — and take away their guns by sending their names to the FBI as “prohibited persons.”

For these and other reasons, GOA is still committed to repealing the anti-gun ObamaCare law.

So GOA was not particularly thrilled when Republican leaders went on the Sunday talk shows right before the election to explain why they could not repeal ObamaCare because of the threat of a presidential veto.

In fact, some have speculated that these cowardly pronouncements could have cost Republicans control of the Senate.

But, never mind, say the Republicans.  If they can’t repeal it, they can just “defund” ObamaCare.

So it came as a bit of a shock to us that Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl appeared on the Greta Van Susteren program December 2 to announce that he would prefer to pass a stripped-down funding bill (a so-called Continuing Resolution) to fund the government until October 1, 2011.

In other words, money would flow for the next ten months — without ANY EFFORT WHATSOEVER TO DEFUND OBAMACARE.  This would take the pressure off Congress to act on ObamaCare for almost a year.

Do you want proof that Congress doesn’t like to act unless they have a “gun” put to their collective heads?  Consider a hot topic that’s been in the news lately:  tax cuts.  Congress has had almost 10 years to deal with this issue, but they’re only dealing with it now — as the time limit on the Bush tax cuts are about to expire on December 31.

We don’t want this to happen in our efforts to repeal the anti-gun health care law.  Putting off this issue would undermine the efforts of incoming congressmen who campaigned on getting rid of ObamaCare!  The will of the American people was made clear in the November elections.  If Congress extends the funding of the government beyond the first few weeks of 2011, it will pull the rug out from under the newly elected members and be a slap in the face to millions of voters.

Moreover, if Congress puts off dealing with ObamaCare until next fall, momentum for repeal will wane and the President will have won a significant public relations battle.  This may all sound a little like “inside baseball,” but if Congress passes another Continuing Resolution next October 1 — as they probably will — then it’s very possible that there will be no impetus to deal with repealing or defunding ObamaCare until after the 2012 elections.

This would allow Obama to run for reelection without the stain of public repudiation for his socialist policies.

The time to act is sooner, rather than later.  If Senate Republicans are serious about defunding ObamaCare, they need to fight to prevent a bill that funds the government beyond January or February.  If the funding measure is only for the short-term, then the new Congress can come to town and deal with nixing ObamaCare right away.

ACTION: Please urge your Senators to take action on repealing ObamaCare sooner, rather than later!  There are two different pre-written letters for this alert — one for Republicans and one for Democrats.

If you go to GOA’s Legislative Action Center to contact your Senators, the correct pre-written letter will AUTOMATICALLY be chosen.  If you choose to contact your Senators without going through the GOA website, then please make sure you choose the correct letter below for the correct Senator.

—– Pre-written letter to Republican Senators —–

Dear Senator:

Without question, repealing the anti-gun and anti-freedom ObamaCare legislation should be one of Congress’ top priorities next year.

Polls continue to show that an overwhelming percentage of the American people want to see this law repealed.

And this is why I was shocked to learn that Senate Republican Whip Jon Kyl appeared on the Greta Van Susteren program December 2 to announce that he would prefer to pass a stripped-down Continuing Resolution to fund the government until October 1, 2011.

Even worse, it would undermine the efforts of incoming congressmen who campaigned on getting rid of ObamaCare!  The will of the American people was made clear in the November elections.  If Congress extends the funding of the government beyond the first few weeks of 2011, it will pull the rug out from under the newly elected members and be a slap in the face to millions of voters.

Furthermore, if Congress puts off dealing with ObamaCare until next fall, momentum for repeal will wane and the President will have won a significant public relations battle.  And, if Congress passes another Continuing Resolution next October 1 — as they probably will — then it’s very possible that there will be no impetus to deal with repealing or defunding ObamaCare until after the 2012 elections.

This would allow Obama to run for reelection without the stain of public repudiation for his socialist policies.

The time to act is sooner, rather than later.  If Senate Republicans are serious about defunding ObamaCare, they need to fight to prevent a bill that funds the government beyond January or February.  If the funding measure is only for the short-term, then the new Congress can come to town and deal with nixing ObamaCare right away.

Sincerely,

—– Pre-written letter to Democrat and Independent Senators —–

Dear Senator:

Without question, repealing the anti-gun and anti-freedom ObamaCare legislation should be one of Congress’ top priorities next year.

Polls continue to show that an overwhelming percentage of the American people want to see this law repealed.

Please do everything in your power to defund or repeal this law.

Sincerely,


Sign the Petition!

Please remember to stop by http://readtheusconstitution.org to encourage Congress to read the U.S. Constitution, out loud, upon convening in January.  Way too often our elected officials act without even considering the source of their authority.

http://gunowners.org

ObamaCare Challenge Tossed

December 4, 2010

U.S. District Judge Norman Moon, a Clinton appointee, tossed out a challenge to ObamaCare in Virginia this week. This is the second victory for the Obama administration in a wave of lawsuits. Liberty University, the plaintiff in the case, has already decided to appeal in hopes of eclipsing Moon’s decision. “Congress does not have the authority to force every American to purchase a particular kind of health insurance product,” said Mathew Staver, dean of Liberty’s School of Law and an attorney on the case. Liberty argued that the law abuses the Commerce Clause of the Constitution in an attempt to provide the government strict control over the health care market. Their constitutional exegesis is completely sound, but Moon was blinded to that reality.

According to Moon, the law requiring individuals and employers to purchase health insurance falls legally under the Commerce Clause because the lack of the law would drive up costs, “precisely the harms that Congress sought to address with the Act’s regulatory measures.” To this we would ask, if the Commerce Clause can be melded to the whims of the backers of ObamaCare, what powers doesn’t Congress have to continue to shackle the American people?

Along the same lines…

A recent Investor’s Business Daily editorial calls it “the ultimate form of taxation without representation”: the continuing attempts by eco-fascists to force wealth redistribution upon the United States and other “rich” countries. This is all under the guise, of course, of saving the world from the scourge of global warming.

After its abysmal failure in wintry Copenhagen last year, the UN is holding another climate change conference in balmy Cancun, Mexico. There, surrounded by sun and sand, it will once again attempt to convince delegates from 193 countries that, a) the world is in peril and therefore we must drastically reduce emissions; and b) the U.S. and other developed nations must pay poor countries billions of dollars in retribution for the “damage” they caused in becoming, well, developed. The conference will feature the usual fanfare, including 250 presentations about the effects of climate change and proclamations that 2010 is tied for the hottest year since we began keeping records 131 years ago.

This is all smoke and mirrors. German economist Ottmar Edenhofer, who also serves as the pretentiously titled Co-chair of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Working Group III on Mitigation of Climate Change, has openly admitted that “climate change policy is redistributing the world’s wealth.” This would be accomplished in the U.S. with cap-n-trade policies being pushed by Obama and his “progressive” pals in Congress.

Despite the sunny weather, the climate at this conference probably won’t be any friendlier than it was in Denmark. Even before the Republican landslide in last month’s elections, many lawmakers were leery of saddling Americans with more taxes during the recession, especially given the fact that China — the world’s biggest polluter — refuses to make any binding promises about emissions. In addition, in the wake of the Climategate scandal, emerging studies have shot more holes in climate change “science” than in Swiss cheese. Only time will tell, but it looks as if leftists will have to find another way to siphon America’s wealth to other nations.

In related news, House Republicans are set to eliminate the climate change committee created by soon-to-be-ex-Speaker Nancy Pelosi. In Congress at least, the climate has changed.

And yet more commentary on epic fail obama’s choice of czar for BATFE

In another example of the “Chicago Way,” last week Barack Obama tabbed Andrew Traver, currently special agent in charge of the Chicago division of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (better known by the ATF acronym), as the bureau’s permanent head. “You might as well put an arsonist in charge of the fire department,” quipped NRA spokesman Chris Cox.

While the gun grabbers at the Brady Center applaud the choice, Second Amendment advocates are predictably aghast. They criticize Traver because of his ties to the gun-control advocating Joyce Foundation and work during a 2007 conference on reducing gun violence sponsored by the International Association of Chiefs of Police, another fervently anti-gun organization. The IACP report includes a call for legislation to allow federal health and safety oversight of the firearms industry. What Second Amendment?

Others question Traver’s lack of senior-level executive experience, but when has that ever stopped anyone in Washington? The Senate may get a chance to question and confirm Traver, who would take over an agency laboring under acting leaders since 2006, unless Obama decides to use him as yet another recess appointment. Certainly Traver would fit right in with the rest of Executive Branch Washington in an era where the president relies on regulation, as opposed to legislation, to enact his agenda.

SOURCE

Congress is in session: Rut roh!

December 4, 2010

Our intrepid Congress returned from its Thanksgiving break Monday to take on several important items facing the nation, such as the looming tax increase for all Americans, fixes for some provisions of ObamaCare, the nuclear weapons treaty known as START and funding for the federal government itself. But before our elected representatives could tackle those important chores, they turned their attention to school lunches, a food “safety” bill and regulating volume for television commercials. Ain’t our republic grand?

First Lady Michelle Obama has made it her cause to fight childhood obesity. A fine goal, but not if it includes the $4.5 billion child nutrition bill headed to her husband’s desk. The legislation will supposedly improve the nutritional value of school lunches and take sugary snacks and drinks out of vending machines in schools. To pay for it, future funding for food stamps will take a hit. We’re sure that money will never actually be cut, but it looks good on paper.

The Senate, meanwhile, passed the Food Safety Bill, which would merely saddle the nation’s 2.2 million farms and 28,000 food producers with even more regulations and taxes. As The Wall Street Journal aptly put it, “maybe the bill won the votes of 13 Republicans because there was hardly any public controversy. These days, the government needs to take over entire industries to get anyone to notice.” However, House Democrats may block the bill — because it violates the Constitution. The legislation includes fees (a.k.a. taxes), and according to Article I, Section 7, “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives.” Don’t be fooled, though. House Democrats aren’t concerned for the Constitution per se, only their own power to get this ball rolling.

Democrats are also set to vote on the quaintly named Commercial Advertising Loudness Mitigation, or CALM, Act, which will regulate the volume of ads on TV. The FCC received tens of thousands of complaints about blaring ads in the first quarter alone this year, but to those who say, “There oughta be a law,” be careful what you wish for — Congress is always willing to oblige.

In the meantime, a massive tax increase awaits all Americans if action isn’t taken to preserve current rates that expire on Dec. 31. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) engineered a rule-making vote that prevents Republicans from offering amendments to stop all of the Democrats’ tax increases from kicking in, and the House voted to extend rates for those earning less than $250,000 a year. Those earning more, i.e. small businesses, will be saddled with a job-killing tax hike. The White House and congressional Republicans are still trying to make a deal.

Senate Republicans have vowed to block legislation of any kind until bills dealing with taxes and funding the government are passed. It’s likely that a temporary extension of all tax rates will garner enough support from both parties to pass, but that merely kicks the can down the road. Rates should be lowered again and permanently, not raised, even if the economy improves. Congress should be focused on reducing taxes and cutting spending, not monkeying around in the school lunch room.

SOURCE

Who Got Stimulated?

December 3, 2010

(This shakedown has nothing to do with the TSA)

“The sober people of America are weary of the fluctuating policy which has directed the public councils. … They have seen, too, that one legislative interference is but the first link of a long chain of repetitions, every subsequent interference being naturally produced by the effects of the preceding.” –James Madison

Barack Hussein Obama, intent on increasing your taxes in January by way of letting the Bush-era tax reductions expire (ostensibly to reduce the deficits Democrats created), has launched a ruse to steal the budget-cutting thunder of his Republican opponents.

First, Obama ordered a freeze on bonuses for some 3,000 of his high-paid political appointees. Then he announced a freeze on the wages of all federal workers for the next two years.

One Social Security administrator summed up the reaction of her fellow federal union workers: “That’s why Obama’s ratings are below Bush’s, and that’s hard to be unless you’re Osama bin Laden. I can’t wait until I retire.”

Well, given the fact that federal bureaucrats are now endowed with grossly disproportionate wages and benefits, one can understand why retirement remains attractive for them. On the other hand, millions of private sector citizens will be working well beyond retirement age in order to make ends meet, especially given the increased tax burdens they’ll likely incur in the future to pay off Obama’s deficit.

Let’s review the most recent data.

Compared to more productive private sector employees, whose income is confiscated to pay government wages and benefits, hourly government workers are paid 57 percent more than those in the private sector for comparable jobs ($28.64/hour vs. $18.27/hour). Salaried bureaucrats enjoy average annual wages of $78,901, while those in the private sector average $50,111, and the number of bureaucrats collecting more than $150,000 a year has doubled since Obama took office.

When benefits such as taxpayer-funded contributions to pensions are included, government bureaucrats end up with 85 percent more compensation than their private sector comparables.

On top of that disparity, bureaucrat jobs are virtually tenured, both recession proof and unaffected by a dearth of productivity. Benjamin Franklin once famously said, “Nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes.” Today, however, you can add government jobs to the short list of guarantees.

Notably, Obama did not order a freeze on government hiring, and I can assure you that the number of exemptions for government agency wage freezes will eventually equal the number of government agencies. Additionally, Obama didn’t freeze promotions, meaning that any federal worker can receive a de facto pay raise by “promotion” into the next incremental GSA scale.

Since the beginning of the current recession, private sector employment is down 6.8 percent. On the other hand, Obama has used taxpayer funds and debt on future generations, his so-called “recovery program,” to grow the ranks of central government bureaucrats by more than 10 percent in the same time period.

Of course, Obama’s wage-freeze charade fails to put any noticeable dent into his accumulating $1,000,000,000,000-plus deficits. Taxes, he says, must be increased to do that.

Once again, let’s review.

Like any devoted Socialist, Obama’s objective is to break the back of free enterprise, in this case, with unbearable deficits. When challenged about his motives, Obama invariably claims that he “inherited this mess” from the Bush administration.

However, the Executive Branch does not set the budget. Congress does. And from the ’09 budget forward, budget deficits have increased greatly.

For the record, Democrats have controlled Congress since January 2007, about the time the housing market collapse began. Thus, Democrats controlled the budgets for FY2008 and FY2009 as they did with FY2010 and FY2011.

Obama Deficits Chart

For FY2008 Democrats compromised with President Bush on spending. However, for FY2009 Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid bypassed the Bush administration by way of continuing resolutions until Barack Obama took office.

Again, for the record, Obama was a member of the Senate majority in 2007 and 2008, and he voted for those spending bills.

The last budget deficit that Democrats “inherited” was FY 2007, the last of the Republican congressional budgets. That deficit was the lowest in five years, and it was the fourth straight decline in deficit spending. Thus, the only deficit Obama has inherited is that which he and his Democrat majorities generated.

Those pesky facts notwithstanding, a Republican majority is about to take over the House, and Republicans in the Senate seem to have found a spine.

If Republicans are serious about budget and deficit control, they should start by cutting their own bloated salaries and budgets. There is no greater sweetheart deal than being elected to our national legislature, where members of Congress are paid exorbitantly, and are eligible for lifetime benefits after “serving” for just five years — one term for Senators. If they are perpetually elected, as is the case with many members, they are eligible for almost 80 percent of their salary as a guaranteed annual pension.

Membership certainly has its privileges.

If members of Congress don’t like the pay cuts, perhaps we can cut their time accordingly. Send them home more often, and see if a little of the reality outside the Beltway sinks in.

As my colleague Cal Thomas opined this week, “The Founders were keenly aware of the danger of a Congress divorced from the realities of the rest of the country. During the Constitutional Convention in 1787, Roger Sherman of Connecticut wrote, ‘Representatives ought to return home and mix with the people. By remaining at the seat of government, they would acquire the habits of the place, which might differ from those of their constituents.'”

If Republicans are really serious about the constitutional role of government, they should identify any and all taxes and expenditures not expressly authorized by our Constitution, and schedule them for termination. While they are at it, they should revoke congressional exemptions, and make themselves subject to the same laws and regulations they impose upon the rest of us. (Oh, and Mr. Speaker-to-be, sell Pelosi’s opulent Boeing 757, and refund the treasury.)

For his part, poor Barry Obama lamented this week that he might have to delay his “holiday vacation” to Hawaii in order to get his tax-and-spend agenda through Congress. (How many golf outings and exotic vacations must our nouveau riche lotto winner take?)

Perhaps Obama should take a tax lesson from John Kennedy, the father of the modern Democrat party: “A tax cut means higher family income and higher business profits and a balanced federal budget…. As the national income grows, the federal government will ultimately end up with more revenues. Prosperity is the real way to balance our budget. By lowering tax rates, by increasing jobs and income, we can expand tax revenues and finally bring our budget into balance.”

Indeed, tax reductions in each of the last five administrations have resulted in tax revenue increases to the fed’s coffers.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, The Patriot Post

Assault weapons and the truth: Here we go again..!

December 2, 2010

The Obama administration is moving into high gear in putting gun-control advocates into important government positions. The administration’s nominee to head the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE), Andrew Traver, should be of particular concern. His attacks on the civilian use of so-called assault weapons raise real questions about his willingness to distort the truth for political purposes. The person nominated to be the nation’s top gun cop shouldn’t use inaccurate descriptions to scare people into supporting gun control.

Mr. Traver is the special agent in charge of the BATFE’s Chicago field division. Therefore, he knows what was covered by the federal assault-weapons ban that sunset in 2004. But in November 2009, NBC interviewed Traver and reported: “Traver says the power and randomness of the heavy caliber, military-style weapons make them so dangerous not only to people, but to police. They’re so powerful, body armor can’t withstand a hit, and they’re so difficult to control, their bullets often get sprayed beyond the intended targets, striking innocent victims even when they’re in their own homes.”

SOURCE & SNIP

And further…

The list of problems with Mr. Traver’s claims is very long. If he really believes that these weapons fire unacceptably “heavy caliber” bullets, he is going to have to ban virtually all rifles. Small-game rifles — guns designed to kill squirrels and rabbits without destroying too much meat — typically fire .22-caliber bullets, which are only slightly smaller than the .223-caliber bullets fired by the M16 (used by the U.S. military since Vietnam) and the newer M4 carbine (used in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars). Deer-hunting rifles fire rounds that are very similar to those used by the AK-47.

Speaking of M16s, M4s, and AK-47s, Traver is correct when he states that the guns covered by the federal assault-weapons ban were “military-style weapons.” But he fails to note that this really just deals with style — the cosmetics of the guns, not how they actually operate. The guns covered by the ban were not the machine guns actually used by the military, but civilian, semi-automatic versions of those guns. The civilian version of the AK-47 may look like the guns used by militaries around the world, but it is different. It fires essentially the same bullets as deer-hunting rifles at the same rapidity (one bullet per pull of the trigger), and does the same damage.

On penetrating body armor, Mr. Traver leaves out one important detail: Rifles in general are often able to penetrate body armor simply because their bullets travel faster than those fired from handguns. The same can be said for going through the walls of houses. But if he had said that deer-hunting rifles can often penetrate walls and lower-level types of body armor, it is unlikely that his comments would have generated the same fear.

Unfortunately, Mr. Traver has done more than make clearly inaccurate claims about so-called “assault weapons.” He has supported banning .50-caliber rifles, regulations that would force many gun shows to close down, the Chicago handgun ban, and repealing the Tiahrt Amendment, which protects sensitive trace data from being misused in frivolous municipal lawsuits against gun makers. He also worked with the Joyce Foundation, which has funded gun-ban groups such as the Violence Policy Center, on the “Gun Violence Reduction Project.”

The fact that Mr. Traver uses the same misleading claims as groups such as the Brady Campaign shouldn’t make it too surprising that gun-control groups are applauding his nomination. Nor is Traver’s nomination very surprising after President Obama appointed two strong anti-self-defense members to the Supreme Court. But Mr. Traver’s nomination is dangerous. Making up claims about guns to demonize them is beyond what is acceptable for someone who wants a position in which he will be regulating American gun ownership.

John R. Lott Jr. is a FOXNews.com contributor, an economist, and the author of More Guns, Less Crime, the third edition of which was recently published by the University of Chicago Press.

More of the same from the nanny government types that ignore the Constitution and Bill of Rights. Now, as a retired Paramedic I can tell you a truism. Get smacked between the eyes with a single shot twenty gauge shotgun, or a fully automatic M2 Fifty caliber machine gun, the result is the exact same thing. You got smacked to death, period. So stop blaming calibers.

“Assault” weapons..? Hey creeps I got a question for you. Why is it that you want to ban effective weaponry to American citizens when the bad guys; be they terrorist’s or criminals don’t bother with things like background checks, or proper training (Mexican Drug Cartels aside.) and buy black market “Choppers” (Full Auto AK47’s) but think that Americans shouldn’t be allowed similar effective weapons..?

The answer is indeed oh so obvious. You “Hate America First.” As well as all things American. Such as refusing to bend a knee toward oppression, kneeling firing position notwithstanding.

Since I support the Minutemen, and other similar groups that support Freedom and Liberty I will in all probability be branded a racist.’ That is after all, what the hell you people do when you cannot argue anything at all based upon logic or reason.

After all, you lost the “sexist” angle when so many women started buying weapons to defend themselves and their families from leftist’s goons… Not from me or others like me. Those folks are often, defined as Social Services, and the BATFE. Best watch out when you go out to destroy a family these days. After all, you never know when that Cop standing next to you is an “Oath Keeper.”

Keep the fire burning friends. As in our newly elected Taxed Enough Already butts. No more of the same old game. No more compromise when Liberty and Freedom are at stake.

PERIOD!

I have no faith whatsoever, in the Country Club Blue Blood Republicans.

Righting “wrongs” based on wrong interpretations of “rights”

December 1, 2010

Socialists,from President Obama on down, look at the government as the
creator and administrator of rights. That is why even some on the left
liked the Heller and the McDonald decisions which overturned gun bans
in Washington, DC and Chicago.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m ecstatic that the Supreme Court ruled
against these the gun bans in these two cities. And I’d rather be in
our shoes today than in the Brady Campaign’s — as they saw their
arguments slapped down harshly by the Court.

So why then would some big-government types like these two decisions
— especially the McDonald case out of Chicago? Because in basing
their decision upon the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, the
Justices perpetuated a false doctrine which has allowed the
Constitution to continue evolving.

The Due Process clause is the place where judges invent rights and
then decide how much the government can control them.

Gun Owners of America argued that the Court should have based its
decision on the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment.
The Court would have then been using a definitive clause dealing with
rights of citizenship rather than the amorphous “substantive” Due
Process Clause where Courts have run wild and seldom come to
constitutionally-based conclusions.

Justices love the Due Process Clause because it has been interpreted
in such a way to allow judges to twist the Constitution to fit their
big-government world view. They love this approach because they love
righting “wrongs” based on what they THINK are “rights.”

President Obama complained on a Public Broadcasting radio interview,
when he was a state senator, that the Constitution only protects
negative rights and that such a limitation (in his view) must be
overcome. Obama made it quite clear that a constitutional republic
that is governed by our Constitution is antithetical to his socialism.
He talks of a right to health care, and a right to a comfortable
living, and, well, a right to anything the left thinks will help buy
votes.

Indeed, the role of government in the Founders’ Constitution is to
protect liberty, and no more. Socialists want government to provide
for everything, making the people dependent, even at the expense of
liberty.

The left is hoping to pit their understanding of the 14th Amendment
where courts create rights against the Tenth Amendment. They argue
that the Fourteenth Amendment, being enacted after the Tenth, trumps
the earlier amendment. That is why they are so eager to inject their
view of government-created rights into the 14th Amendment.

If the government is the creator of rights, then the government must
be protected from the people. That means they cannot allow any notion
that the Second Amendment is intended to be a check on the
unconstitutional exercise of federal power. The constitutional militia
was intended to be an instrument of the states to protect their
citizens from the federal government (by legal definition throughout
the colonies). All freemen were required to own military long arms.

Wyoming is on the right path. Wyoming has a Firearms Freedom Act which
“interposes” Wyoming against all federal laws involving a firearm
made in the state and which remains in the state. Unlike the other
seven states with identical laws, Wyoming makes violation of the act
by a federal official a state offense punishable by up to 365 days in
jail. Had they added one more day to the potential penalty, any
conviction would result in the loss of gun rights under 18 USC 922(g)
for any federal official who violates their law.

States and county sheriffs are going to need to take the militia
clauses of the Constitution seriously. Sheriff Joe Arpaio of Maricopa
County (Phoenix), Arizona has a posse of 3,000. If Arizona were to
create a State Guard and encourage sheriffs to beef up their posse
strength to levels analogous to Maricopa County, and if other states
were to follow suit, the federal government would be less inclined to
assume that there are no limits to their powers.

Such an outcome will not come about until we understand that there is
no conflict between the Tenth and the Fourteenth Amendments, and that
rights come from God, not from government. Government-made
“rights” are the “wrong” rights.

SOURCE

California: Stuck on stupid!

November 24, 2010

Thank God that I got out of there in 1978. It was bad enough back then…

“In the future, historians may likely mark the 2010 midterm elections as the end of the California era and the beginning of the Texas one. In one stunning stroke, amid a national conservative tide, California voters essentially ratified a political and regulatory regime that has left much of the state unemployed and many others looking for the exits. … This state of crisis is likely to become the norm for the Golden State. In contrast to other hard-hit states like Pennsylvania, Ohio and Nevada, which all opted for pro-business, fiscally responsible candidates, California voters decisively handed virtually total power to a motley coalition of Democratic-machine politicians, public employee unions, green activists and rent-seeking special interests. In the new year, the once and again Gov. Jerry Brown, who has some conservative fiscal instincts, will be hard-pressed to convince Democratic legislators who get much of their funding from public-sector unions to trim spending. Perhaps more troubling, Brown’s own extremism on climate change policy — backed by rent-seeking Silicon Valley investors with big bets on renewable fuels — virtually assures a further tightening of a regulatory regime that will slow an economic recovery in every industry from manufacturing and agriculture to home-building.” –columnist Joel Kotkin

And then these words of wisdom;

“In 1920, when the top tax rate was 73 percent, for people making over $100,000 a year, the federal government collected just over $700 million in income taxes — and 30 percent of that was paid by people making over $100,000. After a series of tax cuts brought the top rate down to 24 percent, the federal government collected more than a billion dollars in income tax revenue — and people making over $100,000 a year now paid 65 percent of the taxes. How could that be? The answer is simple: People behave differently when tax rates are high as compared to when they are low. With low tax rates, they take their money out of tax shelters and put it to work in the economy, benefitting themselves, the economy and government, which collects more money in taxes because incomes rise. High tax rates, which very few people are actually paying, because of tax shelters, do not bring in as much revenue as lower tax rates that people are paying. It was much the same story after tax cuts during the Kennedy administration, the Reagan administration and the Bush Administration. The New York Times reported in 2006: ‘An unexpectedly steep rise in tax revenues from corporations and the wealthy is driving down the projected budget deficit this year.’ Expectations are in the eyes of the beholder — and in the rhetoric of the demagogues. If class warfare is more important to some politicians than collecting more revenue when there is a deficit, then let the voters know that. And spare us so-called ‘deficit reduction commissions.'” –columnist Thomas Sowell

SOURCE

Gun Owners of America has two major goals in 2012

November 24, 2010

First — make Barack Obama a one-term President.

Second — make Harry Reid the minority leader in the Senate.

I traveled to Bozeman, Montana on Saturday, November 13th to deliver the Gun Owners of America endorsement for Steve Daines for United States Senate to defeat John Tester in 2012.

Remembering that the 13th was less than two weeks after the November 2nd Election, a time when most people were worn out and resting from the hard work of the last few months, I was blown away by the crowd in attendance.

There were at least 200-300 people in the room on that Saturday morning to listen to Steve Daines give his announcement speech… and he didn’t disappoint them.

In a speech that highlighted the roots of his family (5-generations) who came to America and settled in Montana, he also stressed saving our economy, cutting taxes, putting the federal government on a major diet and PROTECTING THE SECOND AMENDMENT.

Music to my ears.

Folks, this guy is the real deal.

After Daines gave his announcement, it was my turn to give the Gun Owners of America endorsement, which was easy since I had the chance to spend time with and to learn about Steve over the past few months.

And it was easy since he is running to unseat Senator John Tester, who has an “F” rating from GOA.

Tester is the poster boy for voting pro-gun on one item and then stabbing pro-gunners in the back and voting anti-gun on the next.

Some examples:

Tester voted to confirm anti-gun leftists Sonya Sotomayor and Elena Kagan to sit on the U.S. Supreme Court for many years to come.

Tester voted not once, but twice, for the so-called “Disclose Act,” which was a blatant attempt by sitting members of Congress to stop groups like Gun Owners of America from giving the voting records of elected officials around election time. This legislation was so blatantly political that it even gave ‘exemptions’ to some groups to campaign while trying to stop others from doing anything!

Tester voted to confirm radical anti-gun U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who, as you will recall, was one of the key figures in the Clinton White House in pushing the ban on semi-automatic firearms. Today, Holder advocates the reinstatement of the Clinton gun ban.

Senator Tester voted for Obama-appointed “regulatory Czar” Cass Sunstein, who believes hunting is outdated and should be stopped and that animals should have legal representation against humans in court.

Senator Tester — are you listening? Gun Owners of America won’t let our members and the pro-gun voters of Montana and America forget how you voted on these key issues before you face the Montana electorate in 2012.

I hope every American and every organization that believes in the Constitution of the United States, and the crucial need to protect it, has the same chance I’ve had to get to know Steve Daines in the very near future.

If they do, I guarantee you that he will have the money and the volunteer workforce to get the job done in 2012 and he will be elected Montana’s next United States Senator.

You can bet that Gun Owners of America and our members will do all we can to help.

If you want to help Steve, go to :

www.stevedaines.com

This is one time where the term “piling on” is a good thing.

Tim Macy
Vice-Chairman
Gun Owners of America

Delusions of grandeur: The Big Lie

November 18, 2010

“As part of our layered approach, we have expedited the deployment of new Advanced Imaging Technology (AIT) units to help detect concealed metallic and non-metallic threats on passengers. These machines are now in use at airports nationwide, and the vast majority of travelers say they prefer this technology to alternative screening measures.” –Homeland Insecurity Secretary Janet Napolitano

Watered down? “I think that this is, there’s a silver lining for the Democrats in this election. The Blue Dog Democrats, the conservative Democrats, lost by a huge margin. The majority of them, in fact, were thrown out of office last week. That’s a good thing for the Democrats. That’s good because so much of what the Democratic caucus has had to do is to sort of placate these conservative Democrats and they watered down these bills so they’ll be happy. Well, they’re gone now. The Progressive Caucus — there’s about 80 members in the Progressive Caucus in Congress — only three of them lost election, lost the election last week. So it’s going to be actually a more liberal Democratic group, more progressive group.” –documentarian Michael Moore

Government as charity: “[The government doesn’t] really need to give money to us to give away, they should be giving money. I set up this charity so that I could help people and a lot of charities are set up, by you know, the Gates Foundation, the World Health Organization, the Clinton Foundation because they want to help people and it seems that individuals are trying to help people where as government should be doing our job for us but unfortunately they’re not so we’ve got to step up to the plate and try to do as much as we can.” –uber-wealthy singer Elton John, complaining that the government doesn’t take enough from some people to redistribute to others

Delusions of grandeur: “I’m the next president. I’ll be 35 … just before November, so I was born to be president. I’m the man. I’m the man. I’m the man. Greene’s the man. I’m the man. I’m the greatest person ever. I was born to be president. I’m the man, I’m the greatest individual ever.” –former South Carolina Democrat Senate candidate Alvin Greene

“[Barack Obama] used his Jakarta platform to complain about Israel building apartments for her growing population. Where? In Jerusalem, the capital of Israel. To make matters even worse, Jakarta is a city no Israeli is allowed to enter!” –columnist Ken Blackwell

“President Obama stood in front of India’s congress and bowed low before he gave a speech to them. The gesture didn’t work. The lawmakers still observed the Indian custom of putting the American on hold for twenty minutes before they’d listen to them.” –comedian Argus Hamilton

“Obama’s overseas trip has been such a disaster that people in Kenya now claim that he has an American birth certificate.” –comedian Jay Leno

“Time was that telling a government agent not to ‘touch my junk’ was so obvious that citizens didn’t need to bother. Thanks to Janet Napolitano, now we have government agents groping nuns and taking naked pictures of the rest of us.” –columnist Bryan Preston

SOURCE

Village idiots: Stuck on Stupid

November 12, 2010

Some things never change; like being stuck on stupid!

Fighting for Pelosi: “Speaker Nancy Pelosi is one of the strongest, most progressive leaders in Washington. Her determination brought health care reform back to life last winter, when the Senate and the White House were ready to scale back. She fought harder than anyone for bigger, better job creation bills. And right now, she is the strongest voice in leadership for ending Bush’s millionaire tax bailout. But after Tuesday’s elections, some corporate Democrats are taking the wrong lesson — saying that Democrats should be less progressive and more like the Republicans. And they’re pushing Speaker Pelosi to step down. This would be a terrible loss for progressives, and for the country.” –MoveOn.org

Unbelievable: “The president himself has to reconnect with the people. Remember, President Clinton reconnected through [the Oklahoma City bombing], right? … And the president right now seems removed. And it wasn’t until that speech that he reclicked with the American public. Obama needs a similar — a similar kind of event.” –Democrat pollster Mark Penn (They “need” another terrorist attack?)

Advice: “Seriously, if we ran Tom Hanks, if we ran Oprah — there’s a whole column of people who are beloved people. Smart and good.” –Michael Moore suggesting a new slate of Democrat candidates

California dreaming: “We’re nothing but a mirror of our consistent thoughts. You tend to manifest what you focus on. If you look around for what’s wrong, you’ll find it. But as all we know up here in San Francisco, when you focus on what’s right, you see it all around you. … There is absolutely nothing wrong with California that can’t be fixed by what’s right with California. … If you’re from another state, you’d love to have the problems of California.” –California Lt. Gov.-elect Gavin Newsom

SOURCE