Archive for the ‘mysandry’ Category

H.R.1388 “The Give Act” Mein Führer Requires YOU to SERVE 3 Years

March 19, 2009

Stolen from Tracy at NoCompromise! Great work woman! 😀

BREAKING NEWS:  THIS FORCED “VOLUNTEERISM” LEGISLATION PASSED THE HOUSE 321-105 AND Now Goes to Senate! CALL & FAX YOUR SENATORS TODAY!

NC Reminds:  Americans have a right to associate with whomever they choose.  This law WILL BE struck down as unconstitutional as it forces one to a form of slavery! Big bubby will not tell my children or me where to serve if we choose not to serve a Marxist regime!  I choose where I will volunteer!  PERIOD!

hat tip to Git-R-Done

pimpf“Arbeit macht frei” is a German phrase meaning “work brings freedom” or “work shall set you free/will free you”

NC reminds:  No!  The TRUTH shall set you free NOT working for some bloated gub’ment!

This is up for a vote on Tuesday.

When “volunteerism” becomes required, then it is no longer volunteerism. It becomes slavery! Here is the link to the bill:
H.R. 1388:

This is the equivalent of brown shirts and the “Arbeit macht frei” It has provisions for youth as well as seniors and everybody in between. This bastard (Hussein) has got to be stopped! It’s all in the Saul Alinsky book too.

Obama Requires YOU to SERVE, H.R.1388, “The Give Act” to reform the National Service HR 1388, will hit the House floor on Tuesday. It is called the Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act (The Give Act.) The House is scheduled to Rule this week. Sponsored by Democrat Representative Carolyn McCarthy (NY), Education and Labor Committee. The objective is to reauthorize and reform the national service laws.

Happy Fascist!

Happy Fascist!

Democrat Rep. McCarthy is sponsoring the bill with 25 co-sponsors, ALL Democrats, including Charlie Rangel, need I say more? Latest Major Action: 3/11/2009 House committee/subcommittee actions. Status: Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas: 34 and Nays: 3.

NC Reminds:  The gub’ment DOES NOT POSSESS a RIGHT to REQUIRE individuals to give three years of their time to some “service”.  Show me this right!

The Government has the right to require individuals to give 3 years service under the guise of “volunteer” service. It talks about uniforms and “camps.” They revise the word “camps” and call it “campus.” There is also language about Seniors and Community organizations.

¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

Above the gates as you enter, it says: Arbeit Macht Frei, work will set you free. Man is capable of such wrong doing in the name of a cause, again and again through out history a charismatic man promises eutopia at the cost of abhorrent acts as a means to it.


¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤ ¤¤¤¤¤¤¤¤

Some language in the Bill is particularly disturbing like:

“leverage Federal investments to increase State, local, business, and philanthropic resources to address national and local challenges;
encourage national service efforts to address pressing national challenges, such as improving education for low-income students, increasing energy conservation, and improving the health, well-being, and economic opportunities of the neediest individuals in the Nation;
expand and strengthen service-learning programs through year-round opportunities, including during the summer months, to improve the education of children and youth and to maximize the benefits of national and community service, in order to renew the ethic of civic responsibility and the spirit of community to children and youth throughout the United States;
increase service opportunities for our Nation’s retiring professionals
encourage members of the Baby Boom generation to partake in service opportunities
Civilian Community Corps shall be called the “National Civilian Community Corps”
the Director determines appropriate “Uniforms”
Take note of the Miscellaneous Section (Title VI) of the Bill. Very Strange!!!
Sec. 601. Amtrak waste disposal. -Sec. 602. Exchange program with countries in transition from totalitarianism to Democracy.Here is the Obama spin on it:  This is an article from the Department of Education and Labor.
I am concerned about “Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.” This Bill doesn’t sound like FREEDOM to me no matter how you dress it up.
‘SEC. 115. PARTICIPATION OF STUDENTS AND TEACHERS FROM PRIVATE SCHOOLS.’

(a) In General- To the extent consistent with the number of students in the State, territory, or Indian tribe or in the school district of the local educational agency involved who are enrolled in private nonprofit elementary and secondary schools, such State, Territory, Indian tribe, or agency shall (after consultation with appropriate private school representatives) make provision–
(1) for the inclusion of services and arrangements for the benefit of such students so as to allow for the equitable participation of such students in the programs implemented to carry out the objectives and provide the benefits described in this part; and
(2) for the training of the teachers of such students so as to allow for the equitable participation of such teachers in the programs implemented to carry out the objectives and provide the benefits described in this part.
(a), or if the Corporation determines that a State, Territory, Indian tribe, or local educational agency substantially fails or is unwilling to provide for such participation on an equitable basis, the Chief Executive Officer shall waive such requirements and shall arrange for the provision of services to such students and teachers. Such waivers shall be subject to the requirements of sections 9503 and 9504 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 7883 and 7884).
(b) Waiver- If a State, Territory, Indian tribe, or local educational agency is prohibited by law from providing for the participation of students or teachers from private nonprofit schools as required by subsection

Please contact your Elected Officials and demand that they oppose HR 1388.

Senate

House

b-hopelessenslaved

Civil Liberties versus Civil Rights

March 10, 2009

Civil Liberties versus Civil Rights. Over the past weekend my mailbox was inundated with questions having to do with the subject. I got tired of responding individually and decided to write a short essay about it. Basically, a comparison contrast piece.

First, some definitions;

Civil Liberties

civil liberties n. rights or freedoms given to the people by the First Amendment to the Constitution, by common law, or legislation, allowing the individual to be free to speak, think, assemble, organize, worship, or petition without government (or even private) interference or restraints. These liberties are protective in nature, while civil rights form a broader concept and include positive elements such as the right to use facilities, the right to an equal education, or the right to participate in government. (See: civil, civil rights)

SOURCE

Civil Rights

Personal liberties that belong to an individual, owing to his or her status as a citizen or resident of a particular country or community.

The most common legal application of the term civil rights involves the rights guaranteed to U.S. citizens and residents by legislation and by the Constitution. Civil rights protected by the Constitution include Freedom of Speech and freedom from certain types of discrimination.

SOURCE

Leave it to Lawyers to muck things up beyond belief! They are nearly as bad as Economist’s when it comes to turning something, anything, from the profoundly simple to that which only confuses.

Both Liberties and Rights have much in common, or at least they appear to. So then, how are they differentiated one from the other? One must step away from politics and enter the metaphysical world of ethics.

In the realm of ethics, as applied in this context, there are the Natural and Unalienable Rights. These are rights that you, as a person are in fact born with, and can never be taken from you.

There are also Inalienable Civil Liberties or Rights. Those are rights that are granted via society or government. Those rights can be surrendered or forfeited based upon behavior. (The link above addresses both.)

The simplified version then, is that a “Natural” right cannot be taken or surrendered. But, again this is very simplified, a Civil Right or Liberty can be taken from you. Most often by surrendering a right for the perceived greater good. A good example would be surrendering your right to self defense via gun control. You will always have a right to self defense, in an ethical context, but you can choose to impose self restrictions upon yourself.

Further, society can in point of fact take your Unalienable Rights from you should it deem it necessary for the good of society. That being execution for true felonies.

Confusing even in a simplified version? Yes, admittedly it can be. A Civil Right is a Natural or God given Right. A Civil Liberty is granted by society or government.

These are the crux of such diverse issues as California’s Proposition Eight, as well as Gun Control, and the list just goes on from there.

Wyoming takes a step forward

March 8, 2009

Wyoming took a giant step forward by changing the effects of a law that was passed without a vote, in the dark of the night by the forces of mysandry and political correctness. Just this past week the cowards of the Supreme Court failed to address the immoral as well as blatantly un-Constitutional ex post facto Lautenberg Domestic Violence Act.

CHEYENNE — Wyoming residents accused or convicted of domestic violence may find it easier to regain their federal gun rights thanks to recent action by the state Legislature.

~snip~

Freudenthal said he’s comfortable that judges will be able to review people’s conduct for five years after a conviction before considering their expungement requests. “I think that gives you a pretty good chance to look at it, and evaluate their conduct,” he said Thursday.

Full Story

An Obama assessment

March 8, 2009

An Obama assessment requires us to think broadly. Indeed, tactical, operational, and at the strategic level. The tactical we have seen through the election process, and the operational unfolds before us within the so-called “stimulus” boondoggle that is little more than payback for key sponsors of the tactical portion of the over all strategy. The election in plain language. The  operational focus needs some clarification in order to be fully understood, and I stumbled across another blog that explains it all in a manner that makes the impossible understandable.This involves virtually everything from class politics, to gun control, and beyond.

Three cheers for a job well done at Romantic Poet!

It is a rather extensive post, and well worth the time needed to read it.

Obama Accomplishments Update

March 3, 2009

Gunny Bob keeps tabs on the administrations accomplishments and I am happy to allow him to do so because it is simply beyond me to keep up!

On 20 February 2009, in another embarrasing communications and policy gaff, the Obama regime had to publicly slap down Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood’s suggestion that the regime might tax Americans for every mile they drive.

According to a Kerry aid on 20 February 2009, Sen. John Kerry, after being admittedly caught carrying a letter from Hamas to Obama that was the first step in establishing a direct and personal dialogue between Hamas and Obama, turned the letter over to the Jerusalem consul general. Kerry is now claiming it is all a big mistake and he didn’t know the letter was from Hamas.

On 17 February 2009, on Obama’s orders, 16 people were killed in a coalition operation in Afghanistan, but only 3 were terrorists; the others were civilians, including two children and six women. Obama had no comment on the body count of kids and women he has already amassed as commander in chief.

On 20 February 2009, in a move that infuriated the ACLU and human rights groups around the world, Obama stunned many when he ordered his lawyers to file a brief stating, despite his many vehement campaign promises to the contrary, terrorists held prisoner by the US in Afghanistan have absolutely no rights whatsoever.

On 21 February 2009, in a shocking policy statement that sent human rights groups into a blind rage, Secretary of State Clinton said during a visit to China, one of the most repressive communist regimes in history, that “human rights cannot interfere” with the economy, global warming and other issues, which take precedence. This statement stunned human rights groups who believed Obama when he repeatedly stated during his campaign that human rights would be a priority in his regime.

In the 3rd week of February 2009, Obama suffered his first major foreign policy & security disaster when he failed to convince Pakistan’s government that it should not surrender control of the restive, terrorist-filled Swat Valley to the Taliban terrorism cartel, even though Obama said he was the candidate who, as president, would be more effective in leading the war on terror there. In the same week, top-secret photos were leaked revealing a US Predator drone base inside Pakistan.

In his second major foreign affairs and security failure of his newly installed regime, Obama failed to prevent the start-up of the Iranian terrorist regime nuclear plant at Bushehr, which is slated for 25 February 2009 according to Iran’s government. The start-up will take place despite Obama, during his campaign, repeatedly insisting that his diplomatic skills would turn the Iranian terrorist government off their path to nuclear power.

Despite his innumerable campaign promises to do whatever it takes to win the war in Afghanistan and support our military’s efforts there, in February 2009, Obama ignored the sage advice of our most respected military officers, including the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and refused to order at least 30,000 additional troops into Afghanistan, instead opting for just over half of what was requested.

On 23 February 2009, in another embarrasing demonstration of the Obama regime’s blatant hypocrisy, the Detroit News reported that of the 18 member of Obama’s Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry, only two drove American cars.

On 19 February 2009, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano issued the bold lie that no Mexican drug cartel violence had crossed the border. In reality, according to news reports in major papers and in broadcast media in Arizona (she is the former governor of that state) and elsewhere, numerous police departments in Arizona and elsewhere, the FBI, and the Cato Institute, Mexican drug cartel crime is very commonplace inside the United States and 230 cities have Mexican drug cartel cells. Napolitano is believed to have told the absurd lie because had she admitted to the contrary, Obama’s plan for open borders and pro-illegal-alien immigration reform would be less acceptable to the American people.

As of 23 February 2009, the Dow had plummeted more than 1,000 points under Obama’s economic policies and more than 2,000 points since his election. On 23 February 2009, when the markets learned Obama was going to make a statement on fiscal responsibility, the Dow fell 251 points.

On 23 February 2009, Newsmax reported that Obama’s $410 billion omnibus spending bill contains 9,000 earmarks. During his campaign, Obama guaranteed earmarks reform under his regime and clearly promised he would never sign such a bill.

On 23 February 2009, the Obama regime convened what it termed a Fiscal Responsibility Summit (for three hours) at which the regime said there were no special interests represented. In reality, there were 47 liberal, Obama-linked and Obama-supporting special interest groups represented, including 7 unions, 3 health care associations, 2 health policy foundations, 9 ethnic and racial interest groups, 6 senior, women, disabled and gay rights groups, 11 leftist think tanks and advocacy groups, 4 business interest groups, three universities, a law firm and a financial services firm.

On 24 February 2009, the Wall Street Journal reported that the Biden crime family was deeply involved with indicted rogue financier Allen Stanford and his $8 billion fraud scheme. The Bidens own Paradigm Global Advisors LLC, which was marketed exclusively by Stanford and was operated via the Stanford International Bank in Antigua.

On 23 February 2009, Texas Homeland Security Steve McCraw testified before the House Committee on Border and International Affairs that Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano was 100% wrong in her farcical statement that Mexican drug cartel violence was non-existent in the US. The testimony was linked to Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s request for an additional $135 million to secure the border to help prevent additional Maxican drug cartel violence from happening in Texas. Neither McCraw or Perry speculated on why Napolitano had told the bizare lie.

During his address to the nation on 24 February 2009, Obama:

(1) Falsely claimed that the automobile was invented in America, which it was not, thus making him look stupid and ignorant

(2) Stated his top three priorities did not include homeland security

(3) Complained about government debt, even though the week prior he added $1.4 trillion to that debt

(4) Complained about banks giving home loans to unqualified buyers, but it was his party that pushed that policy

(5) Falsely claimed he does not believe in big government, yet every expert says his policies will grow the size and power of the government exponentially

(6) Touted his website http://www.recovery.gov and claimed it shows details of exactly how the “stimulus” money will be spent, but the website shows no such thing and has been revealed to be a scam by the media

(7) Announced his program to use your tax dollars to help your neighbor buy a new car

(8) Falsely claimed his policies would prevent CEOs from buying new drapes and flying on private jets

(9) Falsely claimed he would never help “a single Wall Street executive” even though his bailous do precisely that

(10) Falsely claimed using tax dollars to create a socialist medicine program would reduce the deficit

(11) Promised to use taxpayer dollars to pay for every American to receive a college education

(12) Stated high school dropouts were “quitting on their country” even though hundreds of thousands, if not millions, served and serve in the military and huge numbers gave their lives for the country

(13) Falsely claimed their were no earmarks in the “stimulus” bill, even though he has never read it and even though hundreds of billions of dollars in the law were special-interest earmarks

(14) Threatened to destroy struggling U.S. companies that do any outsourcing to survive

(15) Said he would end the war in Iraq but refused to say he would lead us to victory there

(16) Failed to inform the American people that under his plan to prevent homes from going into foreclosure, illegal aliens would be eligible to receive your tax dollars to stay in their homes, according to the Center for Immigration Studies

Despite Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano’s bald-faced lie that Mexican drug cartels are not operating in the United States, on 25 February 2009 the FBI arrested 750 Mexican drug cartel operatives inside the United States. This was a joint operation between the FBI, DEA and, yes, the Department of Homeland Security.

On 25 February 2009, Sen. Robert Byrd (D-WV), the longest serving Democrat in the Senate, publicly charged that Obama was violating the Constitution and therefore the law by conducting illegal power grabs.

On 25 February 2009, although the president failed to mention it during his speech the night before, the White House admitted under pressure that Obama’s socialist medicine program would cost not the cited $634 billion, but actually $1 trillion.

On 25 February 2009, in sworn testimony before the House Homeland Security Committee, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano testified she would fail in her sworn duty to insure all commercial cargo containers entering the United States would be screened for nuclear and radiological weapons by 2012, a mandate set by the Democratic Congress in 2007.

On 25 February 2009, without Sec. of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano’s specific permission to enforce the law, ICE raided a Washington State engine plant in an investigation of gang activity by illegal aliens there. Twenty-eight illegal aliens were arrested. Napolitano ordered an immediate investigation because, according to a spokesman, such law enforcement operations are inconsistent with the president’s policy on illegal aliens.

On 25 February 2009, during an appearance on The Early Show, VP Joe Biden lied by saying Louisiana, under Gov. Bobby Jindal, loses 400 jobs/day. In reality, according to statistics from the Louisiana Workforce Commission, Louisiana is not only NOT losing 400 jobs/day under Governor Jindal, but actually gaining jobs, and the Louisiana unemployment rate is 5.9% under Governor Jindal, as opposed to the national unemployment rate under Obama, which is at 7.3%

In 2007 as a candidate, Obama said you have to make $1 million annually to be rich. In 2008, he lowered it to $250,000 and kept that figure in his February 2009 address to the nation. Two days later, after he promised your taxes would not go up so much as a dime if you make less than $250,000/year, Obama released his budget that included tax rate increases for those making above $209,000 and also included other massive tax increases via deduction eliminations, according to the Cato Institute and Neil Cavuto.

On 27 February 2009, at Marine Corps Base Camp Lejeune, Obama endured his most humiliating event since taking power when he was forced to admit before thousands of Marines that they had defeated the enemy in Iraq, in a war he said during the campaign we shouldn’t have fought and believed we would lose. He also was forced to admit in essence that his promises during the campaign of total retreat and surrender within 16 months of his taking power were foolish and that he would leave up to 50,000 troops in Iraq after the drawdown is complete in late 2010.

On 1 March 2009, the NY Post reported that Obama’s “urban czar,” Bronx Boro President Adolfo Carrion, was neck deep in a pay-for-play bribery scheme that saw him receiving huge amounts in campaign donations from developers who donated the money to Carrion immediately before or after he signed off on their project proposals.

In late February 2009, Obama nominated beleagured Washington State Gov. Gary Locke to be his secretary of commerce. Locke is widely believd to be the most corrupt sitting governor in the country, with investigations into campaign finance law violations, brazen conflicts of interest, money laundering and other shady dealings. Locke has been investigated for giving tax breaks to a defense contractor while being in business with that company’s auditor; giving tax breaks to his brother-in-law’s company; personally signing, as governor, a federal loan application for his brother-in-law’s company;being in cahoots with Clinton Chinagate money launderer John Huang, who was a fundraiser for Locke; accepting illegal contributions from Indonesian businessman Ted Sioeng, believed to be an operative for the government of the People’s Republic of China; accepting illegal campaign funds from Thai political operative Praitun Kanchanalak; accepting illegal funds from a Chinese street gang in New York City via a restaurant being used as a front; and accepting huge sums from a Buddhist monestary in Washington State in which the many monks said they did not recall donating any money to Locke.

On 2 March 2009, for the first time since October 1997, the Dow fell below 7,000 as the markets plummeted in reaction to Obama’s wild and undisciplined spending spree in Washington.

On 2 March 2009, the Associated Press reported on Obama having turned the White House into a glitzy, ultra-elite party palace on Wednesday evenings, with entertainers like Earth, Wind and Fire, Stevie Wonder and Sweet Honey in the Rock topping the playbills. Conga lines, massive spreads of gourmet food and premium alcohol for all guests are served as America’s unemployment rate skyrockets, companies and charities are closing or endangered at record pace, and our national deficit shoots through the ionosphere.

Source and complete article

Ayn Rand, and America today

March 3, 2009

It’s no secret that I think quite in terms based in objectivism. This post from The Patriot Post pretty well sums up what I have been blogging about for more than three years.

“One of the methods used by statists to destroy capitalism consists in establishing controls that tie a given industry hand and foot, making it unable to solve its problems, then declaring that freedom has failed and stronger controls are necessary.” –Ayn Rand

“In January, Stephen Moore caused a stir by arguing, in the Wall Street Journal, that the current crisis is turning Atlas Shrugged ‘from fiction to fact.’ And those who are warning that increased government restrictions will cause the nation’s most productive workers to withdraw their talents have taken to calling this the ‘John Galt Effect,’ a reference to the hero — and the main plotline — of Atlas Shrugged. It is no coincidence that the strongest resistance to a government takeover of the economy is coming from people influenced by Ayn Rand. She has long functioned as a stiffener of resolve and as the fountainhead of pro-free-market ideas. …Ayn Rand’s contribution to the philosophical defense of capitalism can be summed up in one central idea: individualism. Ayn Rand demonstrated that the ultimate source of all wealth — everything from steel mills to microchips — is the individual reasoning mind. Thus, a society that wants to prosper has to ask what is required by its thinkers and producers, the ‘prime movers’ who originate and implement new ideas. And the first thing that is required for these thinkers to function is that they be free from coercive interference by bureaucrats, by blowhard legislators, or by federal ‘czars.’ … Ayn Rand’s ideas are the mostly unnamed fuel giving fire and confidence to people like [CNBC financial analyst] Rick Santelli. … If we’re going to have an ideological Boston Tea Party, a declaration of independence from the whole theory behind state management of our lives and wealth, then Ayn Rand is the ideal philosophical hostess.” –editor of The Intellectual Activist and TIADaily.com Robert Tracinski

Colorado Politics run amok!

March 3, 2009

Senator Greg Brophy keeps us all informed about the goofy, illogical, and at times immoral things that go on under the golden dome on Colfax avenue. Reprinted here is his latest newsletter, with my commentary in bold.

The Car Tax

SB09-108, the Car Tax passed the House 34-31 on Wednesday. All of the Republicans and three Democrats voted against it.

I thought Ref. C was supposed to take care of things like that, and a whole lot of other things as well!

Kudos to State Rep Jerry Sonnenberg (R-Sterling) for adding an amendment to allow new axle configurations to be used by trucks in Colorado. This is something that I have been working on since my first year in the House and Jerry pulled it off!

So? There are some with a sense of logic down there? Astounding, simply astounding!

I expect the Senate to concur with House amendments today, Friday the 27th. I am truly sorry that we were unable to derail this quarter billion dollar tax increase levied during a recession.

Hold on Colorado! A full blown depression is heading your way like a train with a stuck throttle! Brought to you by the Bill Ritter Express!

Another Car Tax

Senator Morse (D-Colorado Springs) added an additional buck to each car registration for a grant program for emergency services.

A dollar here, a dollar there. Special Districts are probably the fastest growing taxes in the state. People regularly over-ride Tabor for Special Districts without really understanding the consequences, and now this?

Of course, administering the grant program will require three brand new state employees. Take a look at the fiscal note for SB09-002. You can see that this grant program already exists and has about $2.9 million available each year, but adding another $4.9 million to it will require more state employees. Why can’t the existing employees dole out the money? This can’t be that hard; I’m absolutely positive that existing staff can write more checks.

Bureaucracy in action !

The additional new employees aren’t the only insulting part of the tax (fee) increase. Only 11% of emergency service calls go to car wrecks. Eleven percent. Eighty nine percent of the time our car registration will be subsidizing other emergency services.

I think the stats are off a bit, but the point is still the same. Most cited statistics that I have seen for fire departments ( which respond to medical emergencies along with Police, and EMS) show that ninety percent, or even higher are for medical calls. In my experience Motor Vehicle Accidents account for roughly twenty percent of those emergency responses. Sounds a lot like using cigarette taxes for anything but smoking cessation programs.

Will this ever end?

Paper or Plastic?

We killed the Plastic Bag Reduction Act on Tuesday.

The bill would have taxed plastic bags at grocery stores and other large stores six cents each bag for the next three years and then banned the plastic bags altogether in 2012.

I know, don’t we have more important things to do? Well, yes, but Senator Veiga introduced the bill and under our Constitution, it had to have a hearing.

The background story is this: the idea was brought by a bunch of high school kids who have been brain washed about the importance of saving the environment from humans since grade school. So they decided to rid the earth of the scourge of plastic bags.

The problem is that the alternative of convenience, for those times when folks forget to bring their canvas bags is paper and paper actually fills up land fills three times faster than plastic bags, plus bringing the paper bags to the stores takes three times as many trucks!

Talk about unintended consequences.

Or maybe “stupid is as stupid does..?”

Marriage Tax

Senator Tax Morse is back raising taxes and calling them fees by this time taxing marriage.

The current charge for a marriage license is $10. Seven dollars goes the local county clerk for handling the transaction and the other three dollars is spent on state record keeping of the data.

That’s just what a government fee is supposed to do, cover the cost of administering the program.

Along comes Senator Morse with a strong desire to find a way to fund domestic violence programs in the state, so what does he do? Increase the fee on a marriage license from $10 to $30 and convert that additional twenty bucks into domestic violence funding.

Fact: Men are overwhelmingly charged with non-felony D.V. in Colorado. Unless you are a celebrity of have social or political connections you are denied probation, and still have to attend thirty-six weeks of “counseling” that the man has to pay for in full. Additionally, the court assesses fines, much of which already goes toward DV programs such as safe houses and hot lines. Court ordered mysandry and the lawmakers refuse to deal with it because of political correctness.

Never mind that married couples are three times less likely to have domestic violence issues. Never mind that fees are supposed to be related to the cost of the program. He just wants the money.

YOUR MONEY!

I have decided to join the world of FaceBook. I am not the most professional politician in the world, so I am actually using mine as it was intended – almost strictly for social purposes. If you want to “friend” me, search FB for Greg Brophy. I think this link will work: http://www.new.facebook.com/home.php?ref=home#/profile.php?id=1192617444&ref=profile

I am also using Twitter as SenatorBrophy. You can follow me on Twitter go to http://twitter.com/SenatorBrophy for that.

Finally, I always appreciate a campaign donation you can do that through PayPal by clicking on the “Donate” button, but don’t click if you are a lobbyist or have a bill in front of the legislature this session.



Pay Now

Senate Vote on D.C. ban a victory?

March 3, 2009

As always, the devil will be in the details. The much hailed Heller verses D.C. Supreme Court ruling was a wolf in sheep’s clothing, as I posted about at the time. The last paragraph of the ruling has opened up more onerous attacks on the Second Amendment than has generally been seen in the past. The latest ruling utterly denied the ex post facto aspects of the non-felony Domestic Violence lifetime gun ban, and now the political shenanigans of Speaker Pelosi will again thwart the Constitutional protections granted to all Americans in the Bill of Rights.

Senate Repeals D.C. Gun Ban By Large Vote
— But the fight in the House is just beginning

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, March 2, 2009

By a resounding vote of 62 to 36 last week, the U.S. Senate has approved
an amendment, offered by Senator John Ensign of Nevada, to repeal the
D.C. gun ban.

Congratulations!

But the battle is not over.

This week, the House will take up the D.C. voting legislation. And
anti-gun Speaker Nancy Pelosi is angling to impose a “gag
rule” on the
House, so that D.C. gets its unconstitutional representative, while
continuing its draconian anti-gun laws (like microstamping).

So here’s the deal: The House will be asked to consider a
“rule” which
establishes the time for debate and provides for which amendments may be
considered — and which may not.

It is expected that the Pelosi rule will seek to deny the House any vote
on the D.C. gun ban and thereby strip the repeal of the ban from the
House bill.

So what we are asking you to do is to write and/or call your congressman
and demand that he oppose any rule that strips the D.C. gun ban repeal
from the D.C. voting bill.

Just to remind you of how draconian the D.C. gun law is:

* Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Heller declaring the law to
be unconstitutional, D.C. made a few cosmetic changes which will, as a
practical matter, allow it to continue to deny its citizens the right to
keep and bear arms.

* Then, the City Council passed a whole series of new anti-gun measures.
These include a requirement that most guns used for self-defense
“microstamp” fired casings in two places with a “unique
serial number.”

Aside from being ineffectual with respect to stolen guns or crimes where
the brass has not been left behind, this microstamping provision is
intended to make guns so expensive that they won’t be available anywhere
— including your state.

ACTION: Write your Representative and urge him or her in the strongest
terms to oppose any rule which will strip the gun ban repeal from the
D.C. voting bill.

You can go to the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center at
http://www.gunowners.org/activism.htm to send your Representative the
pre-written e-mail message below.

You can also call him or her toll-free at 1-877-762-8762.

—– Prewritten Letter —–

Dear Representative:

This week, when the House takes up the D.C. voting legislation, please
vote against any rule that strips the Senate’s pro-gun language and/or
imposes a “gag rule” on members of the House.

Just to remind you of how virulently anti-gun the D.C. gun law is:
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Heller declaring the law to be
unconstitutional, D.C. made a few cosmetic changes which will, as a
practical matter, allow it to continue to deny its citizens the right to
keep and bear arms.

But, in addition, the City Council passed a whole series of new anti-gun
measures. These include a requirement that most guns used for
self-defense “microstamp” fired casings in two places with a
“unique
serial number.”

Aside from being ineffectual with respect to stolen guns or crimes where
the brass has not been left behind, this microstamping provision is
intended to make guns so expensive that they won’t be available anywhere
— including my state.

I urge you, in the strongest terms, to oppose any rule that makes it
impossible for you to vote on the D.C. gun ban repeal.

Sincerely,

Cowards of the Court: Mysandry and the Constitution

February 28, 2009

The Supreme Court did in fact fail to address the actual issue this past week regarding the Lautenberg Domestic Violence Law. They approved ex post facto law, and, the taking of rights based upon less than felony behaviors.

Anyone that has the temerity to think that the current make up of the Supreme Court will, in practice and fact defend the Constitution and it’s base principles is quite simply delusional. They are a bunch of politically correct kiss asses.

Since I am more than aware some will view this as a rant against women I need to state unequivocally that I believe that Domestic violence is a very real problem. My problem is with how it is addressed, and dealt with. Men are overwhelmingly brought up on charges of domestic violence more often as compared to women. Further, that when women are charged, the implication in nearly all cases is changed and they are ordered into “parenting classes” or some other such nonsense. Thereby allowing them to continue to be full citizens, as opposed to men convicted for the same crimes. Note please, that I am throughout this op/ed  addressing non-felony domestic violence convictions. When women are in fact charged in the very same situations that men are, probation, and restoration of rights is common. When it is a man? Probation is de facto only an available alternative if the man is a celebrity, or related to powerful individuals. That is called sexism for those that are incapable of rational thought.

The issue of ex post facto law strikes at the very basis of Anglo American jurisprudence. Changing the rules after the game has already been played is immoral. Approving such a thing is also immoral, and that is precisely what our Supreme Court did. Utilitarianism has no place in a republic where people are protected from the tyranny of the majority. At least in theory that is the presumption.

I have no faith whatsoever in the Supreme Court when it comes to protecting the people of our nation. Our alternative then appears to be seeking redress through our locally elected representatives at the state level, and or through the affirmative action by state Governors, as in commuting sentences or the more difficult pardon process.

What then is needed to rectify the situation? Stay tuned folks, because this is getting too long winded as is.

Strange Bedfellows Indeed: AWB 2009

February 28, 2009

Dirty Harry Reid and San Fran Nancy Pelosi in bed seeking to thwart Eric Holder and the rest of the obamanite’s? Actually supporting the Second Amendment based upon the Constitution? I’m somewhat dazed and it’s been fully a half hour since checking an RSS feed that almost makes it appear that the democrat congress is siding with the National Rifle Association. I’m still waiting for a Gun Owners of America situational analysis, and as we all have learned based upon the collective histories of the players involved we had better keep our heads up.

Eric Holder the treasonous creep that he is blames Americans for Mexico’s crime problem. No, not anything that might be rational, such as America fueling the drug business via the seemingly insatiable market. But, naturally, he attacks our freedoms attaching the blame to Americans. Alright, I’ll give him just a little bit of lee way there. After all, some criminals are buying weapons as straw purchasers and selling them to the drug gangs. That is already a serious felony though Mister Attorney General. But, in your (Eric Holder’s) warped mind it is just so much simpler to deny Americans that have nothing at all to do with the criminal activity their rights as granted them by our Constitution. Or is it just that they (Americans not involved other than possibly as victims) would be all that much easier to arrest and convict than the criminals that are part and parcel of the drug gangs that are more prone to shooting back?

Put all these things together and what do we have then? Politicians that are frightened beyond the pale that they might just lose their positions of power and prestige. An Attorney General who has based his entire career upon being a lackey for the powers of mysandry and hopolophobia. That is also all too obviously a fall guy for the administration, and that has a history of being right in the middle of having an innocent woman killed while holding a baby in her arms, and later having Americans burned to death. None of these people are friends of the American people. After all, the drug gangs have ample means of securing sophisticated weaponry. It’s just  easier to have innocent Americans slaughtered and by law, incapable of effectively defending their families, friends, nation, and selves.

What follows is the National Rifle Association’s take on it all.

Feds Send Mixed Signals On Push For Gun Control

HolderOn Wednesday, February 25, just over five weeks after Inauguration Day, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the Obama Administration will seek to reinstate the expired federal “assault weapon” ban and impose additional restrictions.

“As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons,” Holder said. Based on Holder’s testimony during his confirmation hearings before the Senate, those other “changes” presumably include prohibiting private transfers of firearms and banning most center-fire rifle ammunition as “armor-piercing.”

Holder said that new gun control laws are needed because in Mexico, a country with a history of corruption and disregard for individual rights, there’s a shooting war going on between drug gangs and government troops, and some of the gangsters’ guns have been illegally purchased in the United States.

Few Americans are going to buy into the idea that the U.S. is responsible for internal problems in any foreign country, particularly one to which we give millions of dollars in aid, and in turn illegal drugs and illegal aliens flow freely into our southwestern states.

Holder tried to sell his scheme by saying that “International drug trafficking organizations pose a sustained, serious threat to the safety and security of our communities,” noting that law enforcement officers in this country have arrested more than 750 individuals on related illegal narcotics charges over the last 21 months.

Atta-boy to our law enforcement officers for their good work in making drug gangs bite the dust. But it appears that Holder exaggerated the “threat” that they pose to the U.S. On Thursday, a Drug Enforcement Administration spokesperson told NRA-ILA that there is little incidence of Mexican drug gang members committing violent crimes in this country against Americans who are not involved in illegal activities with the gangs. Some Americans who have colluded with the drug-smugglers have not been so lucky, but for that they have only themselves to blame.

Of course, ignored in the discussion was any mention that straw purchasing a firearm for a Mexican drug runner, and transferring a firearm to someone knowing it will be used to commit a violent or drug-trafficking crime, are currently federal felonies punishable by 10 years in prison.

Holder was still enjoying the high (pardon the pun) that he must have felt from his media moment when Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) reminded him that it isn’t the Attorney General who makes laws in the United States. Asked whether Holder had spoken to her before putting himself in front of the national news cameras, Pelosi said “no,” adding, “I think we need to enforce the laws we have right now.” Shortly thereafter, the office of Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) stated flatly that “Senator Reid would oppose an effort [to] reinstate the ban if the Senate were to vote on it in the future.”

Speaker Pelosi and Sen. Reid were joined in opposing Holder by members of the bipartisan House of Representatives Second Amendment Task Force. U.S. Rep. and Task Force co-chair Paul Broun (R-Ga.) said “The Attorney General’s recent comments about reinstating the ‘assault weapons’ ban are extremely troubling since a ban clearly violates our Constitutional right to bear arms.” Co-chair Dan Boren (D-Okla.) added, “The Second Amendment Task Force is adamantly opposed to reinstating the ban on the sale of assault weapons as it clearly would demonstrate a violation of United States citizens’ right to keep and bear arms.” Other members of the Task Force include Democrats Jason Altmire (D-Pa.), Travis Childers (D-Miss.), Brad Ellsworth (D-Ind.), Jim Matheson (D-Utah) and Mike McIntyre (D-N.C.), and Republicans Rob Bishop (R-Utah), John Carter (R-Tex.), John Boozman (R-Ark.), Steve King (R-Iowa) and Steve Scalise (R-La.).

Independently, Rep. Mike Ross (D-Ark.), an NRA Life Member, said that he would “oppose any action on behalf of the Attorney General or President Obama to reinstate the assault weapons ban.”

Unfortunately, Holder still has many options for ways to threaten the right to arms. As examples, he could force the BATFE to once again arbitrarily reinterpret firearm importation law, to further limit the kinds of firearms that may be imported. He could force the agency to discontinue its support of the Tiahrt Amendment, which protects both the privacy of gun buyers and the integrity of police investigations. And though the Justice Department has previously testified against the type of “armor piercing ammunition” restriction gun control supporters advocate today, Holder’s DOJ could reverse course. Holder could also direct BATFE to adopt enforcement policies designed to drive licensed dealers out of business.

And while Sen. Reid has a good record on many gun control issues, there is no doubt where Speaker Pelosi truly stands. She will support gun control, but on her timetable, not one provided her by the new Attorney General.

As we expect to say a lot over the next four years, “Stay tuned.”

SOURCE