Archive for the ‘mysandry’ Category

H.R. 2324 more of the same old same old

May 8, 2009

The usual haters of freedom and liberty are back at it despite what the impostor in chief says about interfering with the rights of the people. Using the same tired old arguments and the same tired old lies the anti-liberty crowd is back to finding a cure for a problem that doesn’t exist.

On May 6, at a press conference with Paul Helmke, president of the Brady Campaign, U.S. Representatives Michael Castle (R-Del.) and Carolyn McCarthy (D-N.Y.) introduced H.R. 2324–the “Gun Show Loophole Closing Act.” Masquerading as reform, H.R. 2324 would impose severe bureaucratic restrictions aimed at shutting down gun shows.

The bill is essentially a re-introduction of the failed H.R. 96, introduced in the 110th Congress. Despite changes from the Lautenberg juvenile justice amendment of 1999, on which the measure is based, H.R. 2324 fails to address gun owners’ most significant concerns. In several areas it is even more restrictive than past attempts to regulate gun shows. H.R. 2324 would create gun owner registration, massive new government red tape, and allow harassment of gun show organizers, vendors and attendees. The bill also ignores a glaring problem–multiple government studies prove gun shows are not a source of “crime guns.”

Anti-gun Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) introduced a companion bill (S. 843) in the U.S. Senate in late April.

Please be sure to contact your U.S. Representative and urge him or her to strongly oppose H.R. 2324; and please be sure to contact your U.S. Senators and urge them to strongly oppose S. 843! You can call your U.S. Representative at (202) 225-3121, and your U.S. Senators at (202) 224-3121.

SOURCE

Apparently, they haven’t heard the news…

WASHINGTON — Amid a wave of publicity about drug-related gun violence along the Mexican border and police killings in U.S. cities, an increasing number of Americans oppose new government efforts to regulate guns.

Recent nonpartisan polls show shrinking support for new gun-control measures and strong public sentiment for enforcing existing laws instead. So strong is the shift in public opinion that a proposed assault-weapons ban — once backed by 3 in 4 Americans — now rates barely 1 in 2.

Frank Newport, the editor-in-chief of the Gallup Poll, told reporters Tuesday that “every bit of data is showing us that Americans are getting more conservative about gun control.”

A CNN poll conducted in April found that 39 percent of Americans wanted stricter gun-control laws, down from 50 percent in 2000.

Forty-six percent said the gun laws should stay as they are, while 15 percent said they should be loosened — up from 9 percent in 2000.

When asked to identify the best way to reduce gun violence, 61 percent of Americans said stronger enforcement of existing laws, while 27 percent opted for stronger laws, according to an ABC News-Washington Post poll, also conducted in April.

Even an assault-weapons ban is not the political “sure thing” it once was. An April 23-26 poll by NBC News and The Wall Street Journal found that support for curbing the sale of assault weapons and semiautomatic rifles has dropped from 75 percent in 1991 to 53 percent today.

Andrew Arulanandam, a spokesman for the National Rifle Association, said the latest polls confirm what his gun-rights group has been saying all along.

“We have adequate gun laws on the books to address every situation,” he said.

The shifting public mood on gun issues is one reason the Democratic administration is not trying to reinstate the assault-weapons ban that Congress let expire in 2004.

Presidential spokesman Robert Gibbs says President Barack Obama believes that “we can make a significant dent in gun violence . . . through enforcement of the existing laws.”

Elected officials in California and Pennsylvania have responded to the killings of four police officers in Oakland, Calif., and three in Pittsburgh by calling for restoration of the decade-long ban.

Gun-control advocates have also pushed to revive the ban as a way to stem the flow of firearms illegally smuggled from the United States into Mexico.

But despite support for limits from California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, a Republican, and Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, a Democrat, Congress seems unlikely to act.

Rep. John Culberson, R-Houston, called diminished public support for gun-control measures “a good thing.”

He said the recent poll findings will help lawmakers “resist pressure from this administration to pass more gun-control legislation.”

SOURCE

Ken Salazar: Stupid is as stupid does redux

May 7, 2009

Ken Salazar is a nice guy. That said he is a near total incompetent in the realm of public service in mine, and the opinions of many others. It is beyond me why on earth he was selected by the impostor in chief for the position that he currently holds. His only true claim to fame in public service is the Great Outdoors Colorado Amendment, and that, by all accounts was suggested to him, no initiative  there. Some point to his service as State Attorney General with pride. What I saw was mysandry, and later siding with Ex Governor Roy Romer in pardoning a woman that put an axe through her sleeping husbands head. That woman should still be in prison, just like every man that has murdered his wife and been convicted has. I am perhaps being too harsh on him, after all, he had the good sense to oppose listing grass rats that infest the state as “endangered” after all. Perhaps my biggest problem with him is what I see as a lack of courage in refusing to go on air with people like Gunny Bob, or even soft ball pitchers Caplis and Silverman.

Then he goes and does this…

Gov reacts strongly to Salazar’s wind power comment

CHEYENNE — Depending on where you stand, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar’s comment this week that wind energy could replace coal-fired power in the United States was either welcome news, or so much hot air.

“The idea that wind energy has the potential to replace most of our coal-burning power today is a very real possibility,” Salazar said, according to The Associated Press. “It is not technology that is pie-in-the sky; it is here and now.”

Here in Wyoming, the nation’s No. 1 coal-producing state, Salazar’s comments drew a mix of responses.

Marion Loomis, executive director of the Wyoming Mining Association, said it’s important to look carefully at what Salazar actually said.

The key word in the secretary’s comments, Loomis said, was “potential.”

“To say that the potential is there is true,” Loomis said. “Just like it’s true with nuclear or oil shale. It’s another thing to say you’re going to switch from the traditional sources to something that would be impossible.”

That said, Loomis agrees that wind energy will doubtless play a larger role in the nation’s energy generation.

“But it will be difficult to approach anything close to what coal is providing in any realistic foreseeable time frame,” Loomis said. “Coal is going to be around for a long time.”

Gov. Dave Freudenthal put it even more bluntly.

“Ain’t going to happen,” Freudenthal told reporters at an impromptu new conference Wednesday that mostly focused on other topics.

Freudenthal said Salazar’s comments were a “dumb thing to say,” and may provide a teachable moment in which the new interior secretary will learn the wisdom of “not making gratuitous statements.”

Freudenthal added that the importance of coal in the nation’s energy mix is a reality, despite any creative hypotheticals by those in the Beltway.

“That potential (for wind energy to replace coal) is never going to be realized,” said Freudenthal, adding that Salazar’s comment was out of step with other messages from the Obama Administration.

For example, Freudenthal said, the federal economic stimulus package includes millions of dollars to develop technology for clean coal and carbon capture and sequestration.

He also pointed out that the administration has signaled its desire to restart the FutureGen clean coal initiative, a $1 billion project to install cutting-edge carbon capture systems on new coal-fired power plants.

“It’s kind of an interesting comment” by Salazar, Freudenthal said. “But it’s inaccurate; ain’t going to happen.”

Laurie Milford, executive director the Wyoming Outdoor Council, a Lander-based conservation group, had a slightly different take.

Milford praised Salazar for “looking seriously at renewable sources of energy.� But she also accepted that coal is a major part of the nation’s energy future.

“We have to be realistic about that,” Milford said. “It’s an important bridge fuel for decades to come. And yet while we’re still using coal to make energy, we need to be working to make coal less dirty.”

Milford also praised efforts by the state to develop more environmentally friendly coal-based energy, including efforts to perfect underground carbon storage methods, and the General Electric-University of Wyoming partnership to develop coal-to-fuels technology.

“I really think that everything the state of Wyoming is doing to make coal viable in a carbon-constrained economy is important,” Milford added. “We’ve got a long ways to go, but Wyoming is getting quite serious about it and I’m encouraged.”

Salazar, who hails from Colorado, made the comments at a public hearing in Atlantic City, N.J., on how the nation’s offshore areas can be tapped to meet America’s energy needs.

Salazar said ocean winds along the East Coast can generate 1 million megawatts of power, roughly the equivalent of 3,000 medium-sized coal-fired power plants, or nearly five times the number of coal plants now operating in the nation.

One wind power company official estimated it would take hundreds of thousands of windmills to harness that volume of energy. Efforts to develop even small-scale wind projects off the East Coast have met considerable resistance from those who live there.

A spokesman for Salazar said Monday that the secretary does not expect wind power to be fully developed, but was speaking of its total potential if it were, according to the AP.

Wyoming coal mines produced more than 450 million tons of coal in 2007, or nearly 40 percent of the nation’s coal, according to the Wyoming Mining Association.

SOURCE

Politics, and blindfolds, as in Lady Justice

May 7, 2009

The impostor in chief is about to have the opportunity to not only make history yet again but to put his stamp on generations to come. How so? With at minimum one appointment to the Supreme Court.

Justice is supposed to be blind, not filled with emotion. Not issuing rulings based upon personal desires, but upon law. This is most important when one is a Justice on a Supreme Court, be that of an individual state or the United States Supreme Court. The rulings that are made in those places have an effect all the way down to the individual citizen. They determine how one lives, or dies too as far as that goes.

All too often high courts thwart the intentions of the people that had laws passed in order to achieve their own (the courts) personal agenda. Be that a State Supreme Court or the U.S. Supreme Court. Of note, or example, would be the Colorado Supreme Court trashing the Tabor Amendment, and the U.S. Supreme Court by endorsing ex post facto law that also takes away unalienable rights for less than felony indiscretions. Or mysandry based regulation or law founded within the realm of political correctness.

Part of the duty of those courts is the protection of minority groups, be those racial, political or based upon gender. We have all but put away the arguments based upon racial superiority in America, at least within the legal concept. Racism does still exist in America, as well as everywhere else in the world but we are making headway on that front where as in many other parts of the world it is lip service at best. On the other two fronts we have not really changed much at all. We have simply exchanged one evil for the extreme opposite. That, is where things become incredibly difficult when choosing a Supreme Court Justice.

What follows is from yesterdays Patriot Post about this subject. You read, and decide if someone should be appointed, for life, to a position of near unbridled authority based upon the contents of their crotch, personal penchants, and ability to go with the flow. Or, upon personal integrity, honor, and sense of duty.

“[J]udges, therefore, should be always men of learning and experience in the laws, of exemplary morals, great patience, calmness, coolness, and attention. Their minds should not be distracted with jarring interests; they should not be dependent upon any man, or body of men.” –Johns Adams

Rule of men: “Now, the process of selecting someone to replace Justice (David) Souter is among my most serious responsibilities as president, so I will seek somebody with a sharp and independent mind and a record of excellence and integrity. I will seek someone who understands that justice isn’t about some abstract legal theory or footnote in a casebook; it is also about how our laws affect the daily realities of people’s lives, whether they can make a living and care for their families, whether they feel safe in their homes and welcome in their own nation. I view that quality of empathy, of understanding and identifying with people’s hopes and struggles, as an essential ingredient for arriving at just decisions and outcomes.” –President Barack Obama

From the gun grabbers: “[T]he Supreme Court has ruled in a direction that gives more opportunity for people to have guns. We never denied that right. We don’t want to take their guns away. We want them registered … and we have to rid the debate of the misconceptions that people have about what gun safety means.” –Nancy Pelosi

Non Compos Mentis: “Welcome to Cinco de Cuatro — Cinco de Mayo at the White House.” –Barack Obama (click here for video)

Quite taken with himself: “Everywhere I go, crowds spontaneously assemble. They start to cheer, whether I go to a play on Broadway or I’m going home to Wilmington, Delaware. I walk on the train. People stand up and clap.” –Vice President Joe Biden

Tacky: “If we had pursued what President Nixon declared in 1970 as the war on cancer, we would have cured many strains. I think Jack Kemp would be alive today. And that research has saved or prolonged many lives, including mine.” –Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA), who fits in just fine with his new party **”Specter’s use of Kemp’s death is not only tasteless but nonsensical. If Republicans killed Kemp by blocking cancer research, how is it that the research they blocked prolonged Specter’s life?” –James Taranto

“That President Obama has made ’empathy’ with certain groups one of his criteria for choosing a Supreme Court nominee is a dangerous sign of how much further the Supreme Court may be pushed away from the rule of law and toward even more arbitrary judicial edicts to advance the agenda of the left and set it in legal concrete, immune from the democratic process. Would you want to go into court to appear before a judge with ’empathy’ for groups A, B and C, if you were a member of groups X, Y or Z? Nothing could be further from the rule of law.” –Hoover Institution economist Thomas Sowell

“Mr. Obama will make Supreme Court history, all right. He will become the first president in American history to make lawlessness an explicit standard for Supreme Court justices. … He has boldly proclaimed that he intends to make sure his nominees to the Supreme Court don’t harbor any crusty fealty to the written Constitution, or the millenniums of Western law that undergird its principles, or to the timeless truths that underlie our Declaration of Independence.” –Judicial Confirmation Network counsel Wendy E. Long

“There is a reason that Lady Justice wears a blindfold. Justice is supposed to be blind to the race, gender, finances, politics — and every other ’empathy’-eliciting — characteristic of those who seek it in good faith.” –columnist Carol Platt Liebau

“It is dangerous in this day and age to use the word ‘fascism’ lightly. Liberals sling around the term ‘fascism’ without regard to its meaning — for the Left, ‘fascism’ applies to everything from religious social perspectives to conservative tax cut prescriptions. But economic fascism has a precise, defined meaning. And Barack Obama’s economic policy fulfills that meaning in every conceivable way.” –radio talk-show host Jerry Doyle

“Liberals do not win elections for Republicans. Conservatives win elections. Whenever conservatives try to placate liberals and show how sensitive and caring and in touch with the feelings and concerns of the other party they are, they lose. But when Republicans stand on principles and demonstrate conviction and give evidence that their ideas work, they win.” –columnist Cal Thomas

“The killer virus for Republicans hasn’t been intolerance inside the party for moderates. What cost Republicans control of the White House and Congress was alleged conservatives behaving too much like Democrats, especially on spending.” –columnist Brendan Miniter

All quotes by former Congressman Jack Kemp (1935-2009)

“As the GOP stumbles around Washington trying to be the party of Herbert Hoover, it’s sad to see so many Republicans drifting so far and so fast from the Reagan model that helped pave the way for the great, non-inflationary economic and jobs expansion of the past 25 years.”

“Democrats are quick to draw parallels with the stock-market crash of 1929. The irony is that it’s mostly the Democrats who want to repeat the mistakes that turned the Crash of ’29 into the Great Depression.”

“The first order of business must be debunking the Democrats’ notion that higher taxes will lead to a more prosperous America.”

“When you tax something you get less of it, and when you reward something you get more of it.”

“Our friends in the other party say the economy is moving forward, and it is. But it is moving like a ship dragging an anchor, the anchor of high taxes, excessive regulation and big government.”

Will the man that refuses to show his real birth certificate choose wisely, or rather based upon political correctness and expediency? Only time will tell.

More on the first 100 days…

May 2, 2009

It’s no secret to regular readers of this blog that I think that the impostor in chief is the single biggest disaster this nation has encountered in my fifty-seven years. Beating out Jimmy Carter and the socialism of Lyndon Johnson takes some doing but, he has succeeded in doing so, and in a very short amount of time. Mark Alexander distills these first hundred days with class and style well beyond my meager skills.

The Peaceful Revolution’s First 100 Days

By Mark Alexander

Last fall, Barack Hussein Obama pledged that his administration would carry out a “fundamental transformation of the United States of America.” Today, as we reflect on the first 100 days of the Obama regime’s occupation of the executive branch, with Party allegiance in the legislative branch, it pains me to report that he has exceeded the wildest expectations of his Socialist constituencies.

In the wake of last year’s “October Surprise” (the catastrophic meltdown of the nation’s largest financial institutions), his chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said of Obama’s strategy, “Rule 1: Never allow a crisis to go to waste. They are opportunities to do big things.”

Indeed, Obama has done BIG things. In the words of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, “Obama’s first 100 days have been spectacularly successful. Obama is the strongest domestic Democratic President since Lyndon Johnson. … In just 100 days, Obama has been devastatingly effective in moving forward swiftly the most radical, government-expanding agenda in American history.”

How did that happen?

Some political scientists argue that democracy is a conduit for “peaceful revolutions,” including radical shifts in political ideology, without a shot being fired.

I agree, except that our nation is not a “dumbocracy.” It is a republic, or at least it was before the once proud Democrat Party became infested with Socialists, who masterfully co-opted the education system along with the modern “opiate of the masses” (television and print media), and re-educated those masses.

So successful has this Leftist strategy been that their dumbed-down constituencies now follow their messianic leader like dullard lemmings.

Consequently, here is an account of a few notable events from the first 100 days of “hope and change.”

Under the aegis of “economic stimulus,” Obama promptly raided the Treasury and doled it out to his constituencies — at terrible expense to this and future generations. Asked how one might evaluate the effectiveness of his plan, Obama replied, “I think my initial measure of success is creating or saving four million jobs.” Not even Bill Clinton had the hubris to suggest something as slick as “saving four million jobs.”

Remarkably, Obama managed to ram that one through Congress without a single Democrat claiming to have read it.

As for his cabinet, a long list of Obama nominees agreed to pay back taxes in return for rubber stamp appointments, including Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, who, despite owing more than $40,000 now oversees the IRS.

Poor nominee Tom Daschle, who in a previous life as Demo Senate Majority Leader proclaimed, “Tax cheaters cheat us all, and the IRS should enforce our laws to the letter.” He was all but confirmed as HHS Secretary until we learned that he had cheated us out of $130,000 in back taxes. Apparently even Obama’s hypocrisy knows some limits.

Obama last fall repeatedly promised to end the practice of special interest earmarks. Then, he signed an appropriations bill with more than 8,000 earmarks, including $2 billion for House Appropriations Chairman David Obey’s lobbyist son’s projects, $3.7 billion for contracts to Sen. Diane Feinstein’s husband’s company, and $4.19 billion for Obama’s favorite voter fraud outfit, ACORN.

When the pork-laden bill passed, Obama had the audacity to proclaim, “I’m proud that we passed a recovery plan free of earmarks.”

Obama also converted the Federal Reserve and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation into instruments for nationalizing the banking system.

Under the pretense of responding to “global warming,” Obama has plans to impose almost $2 trillion in cap-and-tax energy taxes — this despite his oft-repeated pledge that 95 percent of Americans wouldn’t see their taxes increased.

Obama’s $3.5 trillion 2010 budget includes projections for more than $9 trillion in near-term increases of national debt. Feigning fiscal integrity, Obama demanded budget cuts of $100 million — which is to say that even while obscenely expanding the size of government, he targeted some spending that was out of line with his ideology. For the record, $100 million represents three one-thousandths of one percent of Obama’s FY 2010 budget, or approximately what the central government redistributes every 13 minutes of every hour of every day of every week of…

Harvard Economist Greg Mankiw also offered some perspective on this $100 million spending cut, noting that it’s the equivalent of a family with a $100,000 income cutting a $3 latte from their budget.

Of Obama’s budget, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi exclaimed, “[F]or the first time in many, many years, we have a president’s budget … that is a statement of our national values. … It’s a very happy day for our country.”

Meanwhile, according to The Wall Street Journal, in February, the price of single-family homes in 20 major metropolitan areas fell 18.6 percent from the previous year, after a record 19 percent drop in January.

In the first quarter of 2009, the U.S. economy contracted at a seasonally adjusted 6.1 percent annual rate, and Americans lost more than two million jobs. No doubt Obama’s bold and swift action saved four million other jobs.

Perhaps the most dangerous of all the Obama policy shifts, however, is his framing of our foreign policy with atonement for America’s past, which he says has been “arrogant,” “dismissive” and “derisive.” In doing so, he lends credibility to the anti-American attitudes and actions of our enemies.

Some of the most telling examples of Obama’s ideology are apparent in the last few of his first hundred days. For example:

Day 97: Obama’s White House Military Office appointee, former Clintonista Louis Caldera, authorized a photo shoot of Air Force One over Manhattan, an event which involved the low flight of a large jet plane with two F-16s in pursuit over Ground Zero and points nearby. Because the public wasn’t told, many feared another 9/11 attack was in progress.

Indeed, an FAA memo prior to the flight warned of “the possibility of public concern regarding DoD aircraft flying at low altitudes.” To which Obama responded, “It, uh, was, uh, a mistake. It, uh, will never, uh, happen again.”

The Air Force reported that the flight of the VC-25 (customized Boeing 747) and its two attendant F-16s cost $328,835. However, the actual cost associated with the operation of VC-25 alone, when considering all support and planning for this photo folly, was closer to $775,000 (and who knows how many Al Gore carbon credits had to be purchased to offset this operation).

On the other hand, the one-time purchase of Adobe Photoshop costs around $600.

In January, Obama chastised private sector executives for using corporate jets to commute, most of which cost $3-$5 thousand per hour to operate. The plane we taxpayers fund for Obama costs $260,000 per hour to operate, and Monday, it was cruising around without him.

Day 98: Obama’s EPA administrator, Lisa Jackson, in an NPR interview about Obama’s Orwellian cap-and-tax policy, remarked, “The president has said, and I couldn’t agree more, that what this country needs is one single national roadmap that tells automakers, who are trying to become solvent again, what kind of car it is that they need to be designing and building for the American people.”

The interviewer asks, “Is that the role of the government? That doesn’t sound like free enterprise.”

Jackson, obviously in need of her ObamaPrompter, replied, “Well, it, it, it is free enterprise in a way. Um, ah, you know, first and foremost, the free enterprise system has us where we are right this second. And so some would argue that the government has a much larger role to play then we might’ve when Henry Ford rolled the first cars off the assembly line.”

Some might argue that “we are where we are” because government has played “a much larger role since Henry Ford rolled the first cars off the assembly line.”

Day 99: After the media fanned the flames about a “swine flu pandemic,” Obama warned, “This is obviously a serious situation, serious enough to take the utmost precautions.” He then promptly applied his “Rule 1” and asked Congress for $1.5 billion in emergency funding.

Day 100: The Obamaprompter addressed the nation yesterday, and not only did he claim, “We inherited a $1.3 trillion deficit. That wasn’t me,” but once again trotted this one out: “[My recovery act] has already saved or created over 150,000 jobs.”

We checked, and Congress sets budgets, the Democrats have controlled the Senate and House for the last two years (which coincides with the housing and financial market collapses) and Obama was in the Senate for two of those years.

â?¨As for jobs, I am sure that Obama has “saved” all our jobs! Hail Obama! Let’s us all bow down to “The One.”

House Minority Leader John Boehner correctly surmises, “The president’s first 100 days can be summed up in three words: spending, taxing, and borrowing.”

Suffice it to say, the list is as long as it is absurd, and you can bask in a litany of examples we’ve compiled for your reading displeasure at “The First Hundred Days.”

As for “peaceful revolutions,” John F. Kennedy declared in 1962, “Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable.”

I would argue this case: “Those who undermine our republican rule of law make violent revolution inevitable.”

To that end, there is some good news on the “checks and balances” front, though some may find this a bit disconcerting.

There are now more than 65 million gun-owning Patriots across this nation, many of whom have taken sacred oaths “to support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.”

We stand ready to honor that oath, understanding that, in the words of John Adams, “A Constitution of Government once changed from Freedom, can never be restored. Liberty, once lost, is lost forever.”

And the ranks of Patriots are growing.

In the last three months of 2008, Americans bought enough guns to arm the national armies of both China and India — a total of 12.7 million guns last year. Gun sales in the first three months of 2009 were 27 percent higher year-over-year than the first three months of 2008 (which also recorded record sales).

Perhaps all these gun purchases are coincidental, not consequential. But I doubt it. As Americans begin to awaken to the reality of Obama’s Socialist agenda, it will be interesting to see how his next 1,361 days unfold.

At the close of the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia, Benjamin Franklin was asked if the delegates had formed a republic or a monarchy. “A republic,” he responded, “if you can keep it.”

We will see.

Quote of the Week

“There’s something very curious — even laughable — about watching the media assemble to offer President Obama a grade after the first 100 days. They weren’t exactly a team of dispassionate scientists in a lab. They continue to be what they’ve been all along — a rolling gaggle of Obama cheerleaders — only before it was a campaign, and now it’s an administration. So now they’re assessing whether their awe-inspiring historic candidate still glows with the luster of victory. Hmm … let’s see. They applied the luster, they boasted of the luster, and you can bet your bottom dollar they’ll continue doing both. … After 100 days, the media still look more like the president’s advertising team than the people’s watchdog.” –Media Research Center president Brent Bozell

On Cross-Examination

“Barack Obama is the frivolous man who concocted his own presidential-looking Great Seal before he was elected. An ego big enough to publicly display a ridiculous ‘Vero Possumus’ (‘Yes, we can’ in Latin) motto and a regal eagle with the Obama campaign logo emblazoned on its chest is an ego capable of far more reckless things. Obama orchestrated a grand photo-op in Berlin, Germany, to declare his world citizenship at the Siegessaule — the Victory Column — a soaring monument of arrogance championed by Adolf Hitler and Third Reich architect Albert Speer. He manufactured his own Open Temple of The One in Denver for the Democratic National Convention last summer, replete with fake Greek columns.” –columnist Michelle Malkin

Open Query

“Obama’s very activism these days arrogates to himself the blame for the success or failure of his policies. Their outcome will determine his outcome, and there is no way it will be positive. Why? You can’t borrow as much as he will need to without raising interest rates that hurt the economy. The massive amount of spending will trigger runaway inflation once the economy starts to recover. His overhaul of the tax code (still in the planning phases) and his intervention in corporate management will create such business uncertainty that nobody will invest in anything until they see the lay of the land. His bank program is designed to help banks, but not to catalyze consumer lending. And his proposal for securitization of consumer loans won’t work and is just what got us into this situation.” –political analyst Dick Morris


H.R. 2153 The Second amendment restoration act

May 2, 2009

The NRA backs this well intentioned, but flawed act. The fact remains that taking away unalienable rights based upon less than felony behavior without any chance of restoration of the persons rights forever is immoral. This is most especially true when it is an ex post facto application of the law.

All to often the forces of political correctness prevail and mysandry is the order of the day. During my career as a Paramedic I went on so many Domestic Violence calls that it is mind staggering. In ninety percent of the cases there was no visible trauma, and in fact care and transport were refused by the “victim.” Yet, the “offender” was taken to jail and charged with a multitude of various offences.

Most often these people would take the carrot offered by the courts, and plead guilty. Then serve thirty six weeks, three times a week, of so called counseling where they learned that women are incapable of doing any wrong whatsoever. Further, that all men are evil, period. Not to mention the three days that they are required to spend in jail as a “cooling off” period.

Too be honest, women do get arrested for non felony Domestic Violence. The statistics at least at my last perusal reveal that this happens a whopping three percent of the time, and that when that does happen, the male is also taken to jail at least half the time too! He get the treatment noted above while she gets sent to “parenting classes” for twelve sessions, and that is in the very few cases where the charges are not dropped completely. I quit checking those statistics a few years ago because they just never changed more than a point or two over several years time.

Face it, domestic violence is something that should never happen irrespective of who initiates it male or female. However, the cure is worse than the problem. (I’m speaking of non felony situations here, not felony.) In addition to the clear fact that women are using this law as a weapon, along with the police and court system to get revenge for whatever reason without a crime having actually happened.

This new proposed legislation is a step in the correct direction but to be blunt, does not go anywhere near far enough. Read on…

WASHINGTON – U.S. Congressman Bart Stupak (D-Menominee) has introduced legislation to restore the gun rights of individuals convicted of minor, non-violent crimes.  H.R. 2153, the Second Amendment Restoration Act, ensures states have the discretion to restore individuals’ gun rights after conviction of minor crimes.  The National Rifle Association (NRA) has endorsed the legislation.

“The Second Amendment provides for the right to bear arms and individuals should not forfeit that right due to convictions for minor crimes,” Stupak said.  “I appreciate the support of the NRA as I attempt to clarify that individuals convicted of minor crimes decades ago should not be subject to lifetime bans on gun ownership.”

Federal law prohibits individuals convicted of felonies from owning guns.  Federal law also gives states the discretion to determine which state crimes are treated as felonies.  Due to the way the courts have interpreted some of the most antiquated state laws, some individuals who were convicted of minor misdemeanors at the state level are treated as felons for the purposes of gun ownership, prohibiting them from owning a gun.

The Second Amendment Restoration Act would make it clear that a person with a conviction for a minor, non-violent crime, whose civil rights were never taken away, should not be treated any more harshly than a convicted felon whose rights were restored.  It would also allow states to give individuals limited restoration of rights.  Federal law currently allows for states to restore all or none of an individual’s gun rights but nothing in between.

The issue was brought to Stupak’s attention by a constituent who, now in his mid-50s, was convicted in 1971 of entering a non-occupied building.  He was 18 at the time and the building was a deer camp.  He completed his probation in 1972.  In 2003, he applied to the county gun board to have his right to own a firearm restored.  But because the 1971 crime he was convicted of was a minor, non-violent crime, he is still denied the right to own a handgun under Michigan law and therefore no gun rights can be afforded to him.

“To be absolutely clear, the NRA believes it is both constitutional and appropriate to disarm convicted felons,” NRA Director of Federal Affairs Chuck Cunningham wrote in a letter of support for the bill.  “However, we also believe that no person should lose the right to arms due to convictions for minor, non-violent crimes, especially those that occurred many years in the past.”

“I am a strong supporter of our Second Amendment rights,” Stupak said.  “The vast majority of gun owners are responsible sportsmen and women who like to hunt and shoot for sport.  These activities are essential parts of our economy and our cultural heritage.  I have consistently urged my colleagues to work for effective ways to curtail violent crime in America, but not by simply passing gun laws that unfairly penalize responsible gun owners.”

The NRA’s letter of support is available at: http://www.house.gov/stupak/NRAletterHR2153.pdf.

SOURCE

More on the Specter of evil…

April 30, 2009

Arlen Specter, what a joke. This is in addition to my previous posting, and why, years ago when I first started blogging I tagged him “The Specter of evil.” As usual, GOA hits the ten ring.

Wednesday, April 29, 2009

First, Senator Arlen Specter provided the instrumental Republican
support to get anti-gun Attorney General Eric Holder confirmed by the
Senate.

Then, he singlehandedly pushed through the massive economic bailout, the
so-called stimulus bill, which contained several provisions of concern
to gun owners.

So it comes as no surprise that liberal anti-gun Specter, who has no
loyalty to the Constitution, also has no loyalty to the political party
that elected him.  Specter announced this week that he will leave the
Republican Party and run as a Democrat in 2010.

Specter's announcement comes only after poll after poll showed him
trailing pro-gun conservative Pat Toomey in a Republican primary.

Specter thinks that changing parties will improve his chances of winning
next year.

What he's going to learn is that the voters of Pennsylvania are much
more concerned about their Constitutional rights than they are with what
political party a candidate belongs to.

Every time Attorney General Eric Holder opens his mouth and talks about
reinstating the Clinton gun ban, gun owners know they have Arlen Specter
to thank.

Back in early January, Sen. Specter said he had "grave
concerns" about
Eric Holder.  He made it sound like he was going to join other pro-gun
Senators and oppose the Holder nomination.

Specter was only putting on a show.

After pretending to oppose Eric Holder, Sen. Specter provided the key
support that brought the nomination to the floor of the Senate.

Why the big switch?

Simple.  When it looked like Specter was going to face a primary
challenge from a real conservative, he talked tough and made it look
like he was opposed to Holder.  Then for a while, it appeared that
Specter would not have a serious challenge, so Specter flip-flopped and
decided not to oppose Holder.

With people like Specter in office, it's no wonder our gun rights are in
such jeopardy.

At least gun owners have a clear choice in the next election.  Former
Congressman Pat Toomey has again taken up the conservative, pro-gun
mantle and will challenge the liberal incumbent.

Visit http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute to support Pat Toomey
for Senate.

Together, we can defeat the Senate's most dangerous turncoat and replace
him with a real Second Amendment defender.

Specter was one of three Republicans whose vote was needed to pass the
bailout.  When one of the other two Senators expressed reservations,
good old Arlen Specter stepped in and brought that Senator "back in
line."

Without Specter, there would be no $1 TRILLION bailout.

Really, by the time debt services and other frills of the "socialism
bill" are accounted for, the cost will be over $3 TRILLION!

The debt foisted upon us by Arlen Specter will be passed on to
succeeding generations, AND the bailout is being used as a tool of the
anti-gun left.

You see, the bailout bill contains provisions that can fund anti-gun
activist organizations like ACORN and Moveon.org to the tune of hundreds
of millions -- even billions -- of your taxpayer dollars.

The bailout also contains provisions to require your doctor to
retroactively put your confidential medical records in a government
database.  Medical records have already been used to deny about 200,000
military veterans their Second Amendment rights, and that situation will
be made worse for all citizens thanks to the Specter bailout bill.

Perhaps no single Senator is negatively affecting the future of this
country more than Pennsylvania's Arlen Specter.

Please help Gun Owners of America make this Specter's last term in
office by supporting Pat Toomey for Senate at:
http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute

Rep. Toomey challenged Specter in a primary in 2004 with the support of
Gun Owners of America, and came just 1.7% short of winning.

Specter's bacon was pulled out of the fire only after the incumbent
Senator, President Bush and even, unfortunately, some in the gun rights
community campaigned on his behalf at the last minute.

Well, Senator Specter has sold out the people of Pennsylvania and
conservatives across the nation for the last time.

At the same time we get rid of an enemy of gun rights, we can also help
to elect an ardent supporter of the Second Amendment.

Pat Toomey served in the U.S. House of Representatives for three terms,
before honoring a self-imposed term limit and retiring in 2004.

Rep. Toomey was "A" rated by Gun Owners of America during his
time in
Congress.  Even though he was supposedly "too conservative" for the
eastern Pennsylvania district he represented, Toomey stood firm on his
pro-Second Amendment principles.

Unlike Arlen Specter, there was no waffling on the issues concerning
your gun rights.

Gun Owners of America knows from experience that when we're in the
trenches battling the anti-gunners over reinstating the semi-auto gun
ban, closing down gun shows and funding liberal leftist organizations,
Pat Toomey will be with us shoulder to shoulder.

But first he has to defeat Specter, an anti-gun
Republican-turned-Democrat with millions of dollars in the bank and lots
of new liberal friends ready to give him more.

Gun Owners of America calls on sportsmen and gun owners in Pennsylvania
and across the country to stand with us to defeat Arlen Specter and to
elect Pat Toomey to the U.S. Senate.

Please make the most generous contribution possible to Pat Toomey for
Senate at http://www.toomeyforsenate.com/contribute on the web.

If you prefer to contribute by check, make your check payable to "Toomey
for Senate" and mail to: PO Box 220, Orefield, PA 18069.

Or, you can call the campaign at 484-809-7994 to contribute by phone.

Pat Toomey stands 100% in favor of your gun rights.  Together, let's
stand with Pat Toomey in this crucial election.

Sincerely,

Tim Macy
Vice Chairman

****************************

Paid for by Gun Owners of America Political Victory Fund. Not
authorized by any candidate or candidate's committee. Gun Owners of
America Political Victory Fund is a Project of Gun Owners of America.

****************************

Congress Trying to Implement the Medical Records Gun Ban

April 29, 2009

Well we knew this wouldn’t be going away!

Congress Trying to Implement the Medical Records Gun Ban
— Step #2 in fraudulent budget process comes to a vote on Wednesday

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

Monday, April 27, 2009

Congress is moving closer to a showdown over the largest expansion of
government in modern U.S. history — a bill which would require
virtually every single American to buy government-approved health
insurance, whether they wanted it or not. And, in the process, that
bill would feed all of your most confidential medical data into an
enormous database, which could be used to take away your guns.

This is a bit complicated. But here’s where we are:

Once a year, the 1974 Budget Act allows Congress to pass a bill —
solely for the purpose of balancing the budget — and that bill cannot
be filibustered in the Senate. Hence, it can be passed with only fifty
Democrat votes (plus the vice president), without any Republican
support.

Now, that supposed “budget-balancing bill” is called the
“reconciliation
bill” — and it can only be created if the annual budget resolution
mandates it.

Three weeks ago, the Senate considered its version of the annual budget
resolution. Gun Owners of America asked you to oppose passage of the
Senate version of the budget resolution for two reasons:

* First, although the Senate version of the bill did not contain
language mandating the giant anti-gun database and the huge $10,000+
per person government health mandate, the Pelosi-devised House version
did.

* Second, although Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-ND)
protested mightily that the Senate version did not mandate the anti-gun
database and health mandate, GOA found out that Conrad intended all
along to capitulate in House/Senate conference to the Pelosi language.

Now, the budget resolution has come back from conference, and guess
what?

Budget Chairman Conrad stabbed us in the back, just as GOA thought he
would. His actions meant that Senators didn’t have to go on record
voting for gun control the first time around.

The conference report gives Senate and House Republicans until September
to cave in and agree to pass the anti-gun database and $10,000+ health
mandate. And, if they do not, the Left Wing Democratic leadership will
pass their own bill with 50 Senate votes — and no Republicans.

And, incidentally, when we say “anti-gun database,” we mean that
everything your kid told his pediatrician about whether you have a gun
collection will be searchable by the government. And people with
Alzheimer’s, ADHD, and other disorders will begin losing their gun
rights just as quickly as veterans — who have seen the ramifications of
being on a government database.

Although the next vote on this budget resolution will not be the final
battle in this eight-month war, GOA is asking senators and
representatives to vote against the sleazy, corrupt budget resolution
conference report — scheduled for a Senate vote this Wednesday.

Incidentally, the one thing that the federal government can do to reduce
health costs is to remove the anti-gun federal laws which prohibit more
Americans from using firearms to defend themselves and their families.

ACTION:

Contact your senators and representative. Ask them to vote against the
“fraud scheme” which the budget resolution conference report
has become.

Please use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your legislators the
pre-written e-mail message below.

You can also call them toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear

The budget resolution conference report would set the stage for
legislation to require virtually every American to purchase
government-approved health insurance. And it would use government
control over health insurance to require providers to feed our most
confidential medical data into an anti-gun government database.

When I say “anti-gun database,” I mean that everything a kid
tells his
pediatrician about his dad’s gun collection will be searchable by the
government. And people with Alzheimer’s, ADHA, and other disorders will
begin losing their gun rights just as quickly as veterans — who have
seen the ramifications of being on a government database for the last
decade.

The budget resolution was sold to the Senate under a lie. Senators were
told that the Senate version contained no “reconciliation
instructions”
when, all along, Budget Chairman Kent Conrad intended to immediately
capitulate in conference.

Please show that such underhanded tactics are unacceptable in the
Congress. Please vote against the budget resolution conference report.

Sincerely,

Welcome Home Arlen Specter, and good riddance

April 29, 2009

Any cursory search of the voting record of Arlen Specter will make it plain to anyone  with an I.Q. above room temperature that he will be at home in the Democrat Party. He has consistently voted for taxes, against liberty, and for expanded government. Take a look at it here.

If, and it is a very big if in my opinion, the Republican Party is ever to regain any sense at all of integrity it should be cleaning house. Not waiting for people along the lines of The Specter of Evil to resign. Leadership, real leadership, is so lacking among the Republicans that I think it is like Humpty Dumpty. Broken beyond repair.

My good friend Texas Fred has repeatedly called for a new conservative party, and I agree.

obama still rated number 1! Gun Sales Soaring!

April 27, 2009

As reported earlier here obama is still the number one “Gun Salesman” of the year! His attempts at misdirection via the use various lackeys has spurred the sale of firearms to heights not seen since the Clinton debacle.

Assault weapon ban talk increases guns sales

John Sprague, the store manager at Johnson’s Sporting Goods in Adrian Township, gestures to half-empty shelves of ammunition behind the counter.

He said a campaign pledge by President Barack Obama to reinstate a weapons ban led to a rush on sporting goods stores to buy guns and ammunition, a buying trend that continues.

“Since before the election, when there was a good chance of (Obama) becoming president, sales went way up,” Sprague said Thursday. “I can’t keep most ammunition in stock.”

Because of demand, Sprague said, Johnson’s is temporarily limiting ammunition sales to one box of per customer.

Obama had pledged during his campaign to seek renewal of an assault weapons ban but has bowed to the reality that such a move would be unpopular in politically key U.S. states and among Republicans as well as some conservative Democrats.

Confronting a Mexican drug war that is “sowing chaos in our communities,” Obama signaled on April 16 that he will not seek renewal of the weapons ban, but instead will step up enforcement of laws banning the transfer of such guns across the border.

“He (President Obama) appears to be backing down, but sales are brisk,” Sprague said.

An Adrian Wal-Mart associate, who spoke Friday on the condition of anonymity, said the sporting goods department has difficulty keeping  the 550-round boxes of .22-caliber ammunition in stock due to brisk sales. The smaller boxes of rounds, however, are more readily available.

“People want the large boxes,” she said.

A representative in the Adrian Meijer sporting goods department, who also declined to be identified, said he hasn’t seen a significant increase in ammunition sales since the election, and there is no rationing in effect at the store.

Signed into law by President Bill Clinton in 1994, the Federal Assault Weapons Ban prohibited the sale of ammunition clips with more than 10 rounds and a variety of rifles such as semi-automatic versions of AK-47s and AR-15s. Semi-automatic rifles fire a bullet each time the trigger is pulled. They differ from automatic rifles, which fire continuously as long as the trigger is pulled. Automatic rifles are illegal without a federal permit, and must be registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The ban expired in 2004 during President George W. Bush’s administration, and a 10-year extension proposed by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., was voted down.

The difference between what defined assault from otherwise legal weapons, Sprague said, was optional accessories. Those included bayonet mounts, magazines that hold more than 10 rounds and gun flash suppressors. Except for those additions, Sprague added, there was no mechanical difference between those rifles being legal or illegal during the ban.

Sometimes all it takes to make an illegal weapon legal, such as a 9 mm LAR-15, is to have two or more of those options removed from the instrument.

Sheriff Jack Welsh said problems with assault weapons in Lenawee County haven’t been an issue, before, during or after the ban.

“I saw no concrete evidence that the ban ever significantly reduced violent crimes,” he said. “Legit­imate gun owners register their weapons. Unfor­tu­nately, whether there is a ban or not, some individuals will find ways to get weapons that are illegal.”

Welsh added he is against any fully automatic weapons being possessed or sold, and is in favor of background checks for any weapons purchased. He added that, if the Obama administration attempts to reinstate an assault weapons ban, he will pay close attention to the issue.

Sprague said FBI crime statistics show most crimes aren’t committed with assault weapons.
“Besides, most criminals cannot afford these types of guns,” Sprague added, pointing to rifles with price tags of more than $1,000.

Cambridge Township Police Chief Larry Wibbeler said he also never saw any increase or decrease in violent crime during or after the ban, adding the criminals who are after the assault rifles will usually locate them through illegal purchase or theft.

“If they (the criminals) want them, they’ll find a way to get them,” he said.

Wibbeler said very few fully automatic assault weapons have ever been confiscated in Cambridge Township.

SOURCE

This past week in history: Things that no American should ever forget

April 27, 2009

Just because this should never be forgotten, and we do remember that it was democrats that were running things…

Sixteen years ago we were reminded of the deadly danger of having the left-liberals in charge of the police state. The largest massacre of American civilians by the US government since Wounded Knee climaxed on April 19, 1993. The siege that had begun on February 28 with a botched ATF publicity stunt ended when the Branch Davidian church and home went up in flames, after an FBI-operated tank on lease from the military was driven through the building, pumping flammable CS gas for six hours into the place where women and children were cowering in fear. Chemistry professor George Uhlig later testified that the high concentration of the gas combined with poor ventilation subjected the women and children to conditions “similar to… the gas chambers used by the Nazis in Auschwitz.”

On April 12, the FBI had ruled out using gas because it was dangerous to children. A week later, Bob Ricks, FBI Assistant Special Agent in Charge, said the gassing was “to make their environment as uncomfortable as possible until they do exit the compound.” This excuse came after weeks of throwing flash-bang grenades at the building when people tried to leave.

Attorney General Janet Reno said the gas attack “was not meant to be D-Day. This was just a step forward in trying to bring about a peaceful resolution by constantly exerting further pressure to shrink the perimeter.” This militaristic lingo was characteristic of the feds’ approach throughout the siege. The government had waged psychological warfare by blaring obnoxious music, shining glaring lights and cutting the Davidians off water, electricity, their friends, attorneys and the press. Firefighters were not permitted near the scene as the flames continued engulfing the home. When it was all over, the ATF stuck its flag up on the building to declare victory.

At a press conference on April 20, a day after the FBI gassed American civilians, President Clinton said he did not believe “the Attorney General should resign because some religious fanatics murdered themselves.” The press corps, in an unusually naked expression of solidarity with the government, applauded Clinton’s statement.

This underscores the dynamic of having this crop in power. If even the liberals are for a show of force, it must have been necessary. The blame was put on the “religious fanatics,” not the government fanatics, and the press and most Americans ate it all up.

The media slavishly pushed war propaganda in Bush’s first term, but they will prove even more sycophantic of Obama. Fair-weather left-liberals who often criticize the most violent side of the Republican state look the other way as their leader jails people without trial, builds civilian surveillance systems, and kills innocents.

Over the last eight years, muckraking liberal journalists dissected every word and deed of the Bush regime, but under Clinton very few were bothered about the unambiguously atrocious nature of the federal raid at Waco. They did not care that Lon Horiuchi, the sniper who murdered Vicki Weaver at Ruby Ridge in August 1992, had been brought to Waco. They were not jumping up and down about Janet Reno using internationally banned chemical warfare on American children. They did not condemn the FBI for using explosives in addition to flammable gas and then lying about it. They were not concerned what it meant for the militarization of law enforcement, and did not ask why David Koresh, who had befriended federal agents, was friendly with local law enforcement, and had opened the Davidian home up for inspection, was simply not arrested when he was jogging or visiting the bar. The liberals did not wonder why the excuse for the raid shifted from a meth lab to illegal gun ownership to child abuse. They assumed that, as much as the government might have messed up the raid, the fault was primarily that of the victims. The fact that the Davidians were different and armed – though no more armed than the average Texan – was enough to dismiss their suffering and excuse the death of 80 Americans, many of them children, at the hands of law enforcement.

Many mainstream conservatives also backed the administration after Waco, but the weak reaction by the left-liberals, who Americans rely on as the outspoken critics of police abuses, was more important. Incidentally, many libertarians, broadly defined, also took the government’s side. Notably, Objectivist Leonard Peikoff of the Ayn Rand Institute defended the state’s raid and demonized the victims.

When Democratic administrations murder, the law-and-order right is often split. The left is in denial or supportive. And the press tends to spin the story to make the administration seem soft.

The headlines today emphasize Obama’s rhetorical shift from the “war on terror” and his superficial changes in detention policy. The media push the notion that Obama has cut military spending, when he is doing the opposite.

Moreover, the continuity between the Clinton and Obama administrations is not encouraging. We have Hillary, who cheered on the belligerent foreign policy of her husband, the bomber of Belgrade, now in charge of State. We have a Justice Department even more committed to sovereign immunity than the last administration and headed up by Janet Reno’s Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder.

Then there is the group the Democrats love to demonize: “Rightwing extremists.” Clinton built a proto-Bushian police state around fear of militias. We saw a major blow to federal habeas corpus, which liberals claim to love, when the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act passed in 1996, in response to Oklahoma City and the supposed epidemic of rightwing militias. When John Ashcroft was being confirmed as Attorney General, his very suggestion that the U.S. government could become “tyrannical” was mocked as ridiculous and extremist by Ted Kennedy and liberals nationwide.

Today, we’re seeing a return of anti-militia hysteria. Just as the federal government and its liberal defenders throughout the 1990s conflated patriotic Americans and peaceful separatists with dangerous “hate” groups and Rush Limbaugh’s listeners with Timothy McVeigh, we have the same kind of culture-war nonsense today.

The Department of Homeland Security recently circulated a report that warns against the “Rise in Right-Wing Extremism.” The document is apparently unclassified but nevertheless indicates it is “not to be released to the public, the media” or others who do not “need to know.” The libertarian Judge Andrew Napolitano, who has roundly criticized the tyrannical usurpations of both Republicans and Democrats, writes:

The thrust of this report is that in the present environment of economic instability, returning military veterans, those who fear of the loss of Second Amendment-protected rights, those threatened by an African-American president, and those who fear “Jewish ‘financial elites’” could all be a fertile breeding ground for groups whose power and ideas the government hates and fears. The document is essentially a warning for DHS and FBI officials to be on the look-out for rootless persons looking for the comfort of groups as they may be a danger to American security.

The summary (unclassified) document is terrifying. One can only imagine what is contained in the classified version. This document runs directly counter to numerous U.S. Supreme decisions prohibiting the government from engaging in any activities that could serve to chill the exercise of expressive liberties. Liberties are chilled, in constitutional parlance, when people are afraid to express themselves for fear of government omnipresence, monitoring, or reprisals. The document also informs the reader that Big Brother is watching both public and private behavior.

Do you oppose the Federal Reserve? Support states rights? Hate the income tax? Support the right to bear arms? Know the Constitution better than our rulers? You are a likely suspect of a hate crime. You are in the same class as violent racists and terrorists.

With the upsurge in gun and ammo purchases and the mysterious rise in mass shootings, we can expect more efforts to lump violent agitators together with normal Americans who simply wish to defend themselves and their families. With growing resentment about Washington’s saddling future generations with debt, there will be more attempts to characterize Americans who hate paying ransom to a distant government with people who hate their country or want conflict. With the neglected veterans of Bush’s wars having trouble readjusting to society or simply dissatisfied with the increasingly socialistic country they come home to after being told they were defending freedom, we will see this tragedy caused by the federal government disgustingly twisted into a way to bolster that government.

Many Republicans are making a big stink about the DHS report, but others have pointed out that the administration has also warned about “left-wing extremists” and so it is no big deal. Most grassroots conservatives are rightly outraged, although they do not see the continuity from the Bush era. As I warned them on LRC precisely four years ago:

Conservatives today might be able to wrap themselves in the flag and condemn dissidents as traitors, but before they know it, another Clinton might come to power and they’ll be the ones again accused of assisting the enemy by opposing the State. They might come, once again, to see the difference between love of country and love of the government, only it might be too late to bask in the distinction, thanks to the anti-dissident political atmosphere they are helping right now to create. Today’s leftists, it is to be hoped, will remember the feeling of being branded a traitor, should a Democrat be in power during the next national crisis or war.

The next national crisis has come and the left has for the most part not learned its lessons. Now that their guy is in power, we are back to the peculiar political dynamic of the 1990s, when the left-liberal police state conducted atrocities and dissent was thin.

Of course in reality, the policies are bipartisan. Ruby Ridge happened and Waco was planned under Republicans, and Waco was whitewashed by the Republican Danforth Report. The Homeland Security Department and the Fusion Centers going after rightwing militia were begun in the Bush era. Under Bush the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act, which targeted many of the same groups today targeted by Obama, won the support of the overwhelming majority of Republican Congressmen. But what changes most is the way the public reacts to state violence, and with left-liberals at the throne police brutality and massacres tend to be more tolerated by the mainstream. It is somehow politically correct when a Democratic administration cracks down on the most marginalized people in society.

Meanwhile, the Obama regime is raiding medical marijuana clinics in violation of the spirit of campaign promises, continuing most dictatorial Bush terror policies, and scheming new ways to censor and control us. They want to take over the internet. They are contemplating more citizen disarmament, a move toward national service and more cradle-to-grave welfarism. By casting “rightwing extremists” as the Other, they can use this domestic bogeyman to expand upon the tools of oppression Bush constructed in the name of fighting the foreign bogeyman. It will aggravate the culture war and cause social division, but we must remember it is the state that is doing this dividing.

Obama has already killed a lot of foreigners. He has already broken key promises on civil liberties and transparency. He has already looted enough for five years of profligate spending. Let us hope his team does not react to “rightwing extremists” the way Clinton’s did at Waco. They would get away with it.

Anthony Gregory