Archive for the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ Category

Get set to get rammed!

September 29, 2009

No, I’m not talking ancient naval warfare, or homosexual proclivities either. Although some may believe that what is about to happen in the Senate is in fact akin to the latter for some of the poor souls in various Graybar Hotels.

In broader terms, the big task for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is to get 60 votes in the Senate in order to block a Republican filibuster. But Reid could also implement a legislative option known as reconciliation, which would only require 51 senators.

By that method the gangsters in the Senate can get passed the opposition, and get your butt in their sling. Such shenanigans, akin to Harry Reid posing as a Second Amendment supporter in Nevada are pure dirty politics that are designed to further the political agenda of elitist, not supportive of what you, the American people want, need, or should have foisted upon them. Read about that in it’s entirety HERE.

For my part I am looking forward to “Judgment Day” 2010. They big government “Better than Thou” type’s are in for yet another wake up call. Hopefully followed by  a complete Tar & Feathering of the programs that they have forced upon this nation.

Some people just never learn. It’s a fact friends. Hence;

“‘Democrats lost Congress in 1994 because President Clinton failed to pass national health care.’ I’m not sure if this is another example of the left’s wishful-thinking method of analysis or if they’re seriously trying to trick the Blue Dog Democrats into believing it. But I gather liberals consider the 1994 argument an important point because it was on the front page of The New York Times a few weeks ago in place of a story about Van Jones or ACORN. According to a news story by Jackie Calmes: ‘In 1994, Democrats’ dysfunction over fulfilling a new president’s campaign promise contributed to the party’s loss of its 40-year dominance of Congress.’ That’s not the way I remember it. The way I remember it, Republicans swept Congress in 1994 not because Clinton failed to nationalize health care, but because he tried to nationalize health care. HillaryCare failed because most Americans didn’t want it. … But just to check my recollection, I looked up the Times’ own coverage of the 1994 congressional races. Republicans won a landslide election in 1994 based largely on the ‘Contract With America,’ which, according to the Times, promised ‘tax cuts, more military spending and a balanced-budget amendment.’ Far from complaining about Clinton incompetently failing to pass health care, the Times reported that Republicans were ‘unabashedly claiming credit for tying Congress up in knots.’ These claims were immediately followed by … oh, what was that word again? Now I remember … LANDSLIDE!” –columnist Ann Coulter

So? What should a hard left Democrat be doing in these trying times in preparation for what awaits them? Invest of course!


Canada leads the way; Where is obama?

September 23, 2009

The maniac that runs the Islamic republic of Iran will be speaking at the U.N. Canada will boycott the blood thirsty fool while the Americans apparently will twiddle their thumbs.

More obama foreign policy failure? Read on…

Canada will reportedly boycott Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s speech at the United Nations Wednesday in protest of his anti-Israel comments and repeated Holocaust denials.

Foreign Minister Lawrence Cannon and other Canadian delegates will vacate their seats at the U.N. General Assembly’s annual debate in New York when the Iranian president approaches the podium, the National Post said, citing an unidentified Canadian official.

“President Ahmadinejad’s repeated denial of the Holocaust and his anti-Israel comments run counter to the values of the U.N. General Assembly, and they’re shameful,” the official told the newspaper. “He uses his public appearances to provoke the international community, and that is why Canada’s seats will be empty.”

U.S. State Department Noel Clay told FOXNews.com he knew of no plans to boycott Ahmadinejad’s speech before the 192-member chamber.

Full Story

Guns, Crime and Prison Population

September 18, 2009

According to new data released by the FBI, violent crime in America continued its downward trend in 2008, proving once again that criminals — not more guns — are the problem. While murder, manslaughter and rape have all been on the decline since an all-time high in the early ’90s, killings dropped 3.9 percent between 2007 and 2008 alone, even with millions of guns purchased during that time — especially those scary “assault rifles” that give liberals such heartburn. “These are rates we haven’t seen since the 1960’s, even though the change from year to year has been rather small,” said Alfred Blumstein, a criminal justice professor at Carnegie-Mellon University.

Of course, despite the drop in crime (or the fact that none of these crimes even require a gun), liberals continue to push for stricter gun control laws in the interests of our “safety,” and the Leftmedia (expectantly) points out that crime usually rises during recessions and that the bulk of this data was gathered before the height of the economic crisis.

While government is trying to deprive us of our Second Amendment rights, courts are advancing the rights of criminals. When presented with a class-action suit brought by California inmates, a three-judge district court panel found that prison overcrowding is robbing them of their constitutional rights and decided to free 46,000 criminals in order to make incarceration more comfortable. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a stay on the ruling, arguing that the safety of Californians would be at risk if the prisoners are released, but the Supremes refused.

So, if the Left has its way, we should all turn in our firearms and pray that Big Brother will protect us from the thousands of newly released criminals prowling the streets. Another attempt to pay lip service to the Constitution while trampling it.

SOURCE

ACORN — A Tough Nut to Crack

September 18, 2009

ACORN: Organizing the community one prostitute at a timeACORN — A Tough Nut to Crack

The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) bills itself as “the nation’s largest grassroots community organization of low- and moderate-income people.” Its mission is typical leftist activism — anything from advocating for a higher minimum wage and the type of home loans that precipitated the housing crisis to ballot initiatives and voter registration. We know that ACORN has also submitted fraudulent voter registration forms filled out by “Mickey Mouse” and other fictional characters. But, hey, “get out the vote” knows no bounds. Also, Barack Obama worked alongside ACORN during his own “community organizing” days.

This week, news broke that the Census Bureau, which had planned to partner with ACORN in next year’s census, severed all ties with the organization. Then the U.S. House and Senate each voted to deny the group access to further federal housing funds (though who knows what will happen in Conference Committee). Even the Obama White House “distanced” itself from this taxpayer-funded organization.

So why all the fuss? If inquiring minds read only The New York Times, they might be in the same blissfully ignorant boat as ABC News anchor Charlie Gibson, who, when asked about the ACORN scandal, claimed, “I don’t even know about it.”

The story began when two young conservative activists, James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles, posed as a pimp and a prostitute seeking advice on obtaining a loan for a home to use as a brothel, evading income tax on the young woman’s income and claiming as dependents underage El Salvadoran girls they wanted to employ. In five different ACORN offices (Baltimore, DC, New York, and San Diego and San Bernardino, California), workers bit on the story, hooker, line and sinker, freely giving pointers without so much as batting an eye on how to get illegal loans and evade taxes. The videos are posted on Andrew Breitbart’s BigGovernment.com. None showed concern for the obvious implication of child abuse.

The Times, however, with the motto “All the News That’s Fit to Print,” didn’t find anything fit to print until days later, and then only with the laughable headline, “Conservatives Draw Blood From Acorn.” As Charlie Gibson condescended, “[M]aybe this is just one you leave to the cables.”

The truly unfortunate thing is that ACORN has received more than $50 million in taxpayer dollars since 1994 and was set to receive $8.5 billion in “stimulus” cash. Most Democrats are feverishly turning off the funding spigot before this scandal drags their own political skeletons out of the closet. For the record, however, seven senators voted to continue funding this criminal enterprise, and, not surprisingly, they’re all Democrats: Sheldon Whitehouse (RI), Dick Durbin (IL), Roland Burris (IL), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Bob Casey Jr. (PA), Patrick Leahy (VT) and self-proclaimed socialist independent Bernie Sanders (VT). In addition, 75 (yes, seventy-five) House Democrats voted to continue throwing our money at the group. Space doesn’t permit us to list the names of these disgraceful twits, but BigGovernment.com has them for all to see.

One of the ACORN workers did tell O’Keefe, “Honesty is not going to get you the house.” Perhaps she meant “House” with a capital “H.” In any case, O’Keefe and Giles deserve a medal.

On Cross-Examination

“Good thing I wasn’t drinking coffee when I read the Politico headline about Team Obama trying to run away from ACORN: ‘W.H. distances from activist group.’ Choking. Up. With. Laughter. Barack Obama can no more disown ACORN than he could disown his own shadow. He IS ACORN. And ACORN is him. The ‘accountability’ that White House flack Robert Gibbs says they take ‘extremely seriously’ doesn’t extend to Team Obama itself — and the accountability they have evaded for pouring more than $800,000 into an ACORN front group for campaign advance work that was mysteriously re-classified as ‘get-out-the-vote’ work. As for the ACORN ‘advisory committee’ that will ‘audit’ the group’s illicit activities, I repeat: Choking. Up. With. Laughter.” –columnist and blogger Michelle Malkin

From the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ File

“The truth remains that thousands of New Yorkers who are facing foreclosure depend on charitable organizations like Acorn for assistance.” –Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)

But as Investor’s Business Daily argues, “The fact is that this ‘charitable organization’ helped precipitate the mortgage meltdown that shattered the economy. It was Acorn, under the cover of the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), that intimidated banks through mob action into making risky loans in the name of ‘fairness’ to people who could not afford them. The tactics, taken straight from the pages of Saul Alinsky’s ‘Rules for Radicals,’ were used by Acorn as early as 1991, when it took over the House Banking Committee room for two days to protest efforts to scale back the CRA.”

SOURCE

President Jimmy Carter’s recent comments about critics of President Obama:

September 17, 2009

Fellow blogger extraordinaire Afrocity has a wonderful piece up today that is a must read. Citing the false accusations or back door affirmations that the world is, in effect ruled by racism rather than honest disagreement with positions and policy’s of the current administration. She tears down the walls of misconception in a way that, simply put, I am unable to do. Then, in my inbox up pops this. Ten gallon Hat tip to Texas Fred for this;

PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Corbin Casteel

September 16, 2009                                                                                    (512) 482-0682 Office

wcc@WilliamsForTexas.com

Statement by Commissioner Michael Williams, a Republican candidate for the United States Senate, concerning former President Jimmy Carter’s

recent comments about critics of President Obama:

“I have immense respect for President Carter, but I fundamentally disagree with the notion that opponents of President Obama’s immense spending proposals are motivated by race. As a black man from the South, I take exception to the notion that my opposition – or the opposition of millions of Americans to the president’s healthcare proposal – is rooted in racial politics. It is a sad day when genuine disagreement is smeared by such an incendiary characterization. I oppose the president’s plan because it will explode the deficit, allow further government intrusion into the doctor-patient relationship, and continue to insulate healthcare consumers from the true cost of their care.

“America has come a long way on the issue of race, so much so that we elected the first black president in the history of our country. The president’s supporters seem to want to denigrate the motives of the opposition so they don’t have to actually engage in a debate about reforms that will forever change the direction of this country.

“It is no coincidence as the liberals continue to lose public support for a budget-busting healthcare plan that they have begun a seemingly orchestrated effort to change the subject from the content of the reforms to the character of their opposition. From the former president of the United States, to the opinion pages of the New York Times, a new ugliness has permeated our discourse. I say to them that I can disagree with my president based on the politics of ideas rather than the politics of identity.

“Americans who have honest concerns about increasing government control of healthcare, and the overall direction of this nation, deserve answers instead of scorn, respect instead of reviling accusations of racism. If this president is going to change the tone in Washington, he better first change the tactics of his supporters.”

Cass Sunstein: Liberal Nutcase in a position of power!

September 14, 2009

Something tells me that this elitist known as Cass Sunstein is going to become an ongoing theme here. Time will tell, but it sure looks that way. He stands for just about everything everyday Americans dislike, and he appears to hate the things that those same Americans love. Maybe I should add a new category? Czar Wars?

Sales of firearms in the United States have skyrocketed since November 4, 2008.   It’s no secret the election of Barrack Obama to the highest office in the free world caused grave concern among gun owners.

Liberals scoff at the notion that Obama would attempt to disarm the United States population.   However, this is the man who can be heard in an address to a group in San Francisco on a clandestine recording say, in reference to rural America, “…they cling to their guns and their religion.”

Perhaps Obama isn’t making any speeches about disrupting the lifestyle of rural America these days, but he’s certainly putting people in place to do it for him.    The number one candidate for that kind of hit work on sportsmen in the United States is Cass Sunstein.   Sunstein is a professor from Harvard University, who formerly worked with Obama at the University of Chicago.  He’s now tapped to become head of the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs.

Sunstein’s nomination raises the hackles of sportsmen’s groups nationwide.    He’s widely known for a blatant disdain for the Second Amendment.   He’s even more passionate about animal rights, so much so, he advocates the rights of animals to be granted protected status in the nation’s courts.   More to the point, he believes animals should have the right to sue people.   He’s on the record in favor of an end to all hunting.

A few short years ago, people like Sunstein existed, but rarely were in positions of power.  They were people who took such amazingly over the top positions, but were generally regarded as freakish and weird.  Such is the danger of the Obama appointment.  If confirmed as “Regulatory Czar” to the White House, Sunstein would become the gatekeeper for White House policy for the Department of the Interior, Department of Agriculture, FBI, and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms.   A man who’s an avowed hater of hunting and guns would be writing the fine print in the Obama Administration’s policies for how those federal agencies would create rules and restrictions.

Wondering how that affects you?

The FBI and ATF are the key agencies who deal with albeit limited regulation of firearms ownership.  There is still the Second Amendment.  However, they conduct the instant background checks and make the decision on whether you are of legal status to buy a gun—or not.

Moreover, the oversight with Department of the Interior is vast.  The agency controls millions of acres of public lands now open for hunting.  How long it will last under such leadership is a mystery.   The National Park Service falls under Interior’s purview.  Already, the Obama Administration has moved toward removing all lead bullets and fishing tackle from Park Service property.   Presently regulation covers Park Service employees only, but there’s a clear desire by higher ups to extend such restrictions to public users.

Where does this end?    Coalitions of sportsmen and conservation groups have teamed to battle Sunstein’s confirmation in the Senate.  The US Sportsman’s Alliance and National Wild Turkey Federation are leading the charge and lobbying heavily on the Congressional Sportsman’s Caucus to close ranks and oppose the nomination.  Those two groups are backed by a host of other organizations who convinced one Senator, Republican Johnny Isackson of Georgia, to push for a “hold” on the nomination.

The Congressional Sportsman’s Caucus is a coalition of Congressional members, both Democrat and Republican, who align themselves in defense of issues threatening hunting, fishing, trapping, shooting, and other such activities.  Sadly, the CSC’s clout appears to be withering.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid staged a vote, over the objections of those constituency groups, to end debate of Sunstein’s nomination.    Twenty-two of the 63 Senators who voted in favor of cutting off debate were members of the Congressional Sportsman’s Caucus, including U.S. Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia.   Senator Robert Byrd is not a member of the CSC, but also voted in favor of ending debate and moving the nomination forward.

“We are disappointed with the outcome of tonight’s vote, especially that so many members of the Senate claiming to be pro-sportsman voted in favor of a nominee who has expressed that recreational hunting could be banned,” stated USSA President and CEO Bud Pidgeon through a press release.  “Nonetheless, the USSA and our partners had an obligation to fight this appointment. Sportsmen all across America will clearly be able to see which senators, along with Sen. Isakson, were willing to stand up for them.”

Sunstein doesn’t have the job yet, but this week’s vote was a strong indication he’s looking more and more likely to be the man wielding power over rules governing hunting, fishing, and firearms ownership in the near future.  If confirmed, he would answer only to his boss, President Obama and not to the millions of sportsmen and women across the United States.

Still wondering why the firearms industry has been thriving while the rest of nation’s industries have been stalled amid the recession?

source

update to the story; I believe that this whack job was in fact confirmed.

Can you spell treason? I knew ya’ could! : Lautenberg S. 1317

September 12, 2009

Senator Lautenberg, after having sworn to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America used deceit and dishonor to inflict what is perhaps the most destructive set of law that the American people have ever had to endure. He did so by directly imposing ex post facto law upon the people of America. That, ladies and gentlemen, is called treason, in the legal sense, as well as in the moral sense.

Once again, the race for liberty is on people. As I have been posting here and across the internet the health care debacle is nothing more than a smoke screen. These things are called “false flag operations.” Designed to catch your awareness so that other things may be done while your attention is concentrated elsewhere. These… Czars, they are appointed, not vetted by the people at all, and only on occasion by our elected representatives. Americans having Czars? How many citizens of America are ethnic Russians? One hell of a lot! They left Russia as well as the peoples paradise called the Soviet Union for a reason.

Now? We are dealing with what?

A full blown nut case!

Radical ‘Regulatory Czar’ Could Pose Problems for Gun Owners

— While BATFE is ready to step up efforts at spying on gun owners

Friday, September 11, 2009

Yesterday, another radical extremist joined the ranks of the Obama administration.

Cass Sunstein, who is an old friend of Barack Obama, is now our new Regulatory Czar.  You will recall that he is the guy who wants animals to sue hunters and other Americans.

He also supports gun control.

While his nomination as head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs passed the Senate by a 57-40 vote yesterday, the REAL vote was actually much closer — losing only by three votes.

That vote occurred on Wednesday, when Republicans tried to kill his nomination using a filibuster — a procedure which required Democrats to muster 60 votes.  Every Democrat (except for three) voted for Sunstein.  The three Senators who voted against Sunstein on the filibuster were Blanche Lincoln (D-AR), Mark Pryor (D-AR) and James Webb (D-VA).

Unfortunately, a handful of Republicans crossed party lines to help Sunstein overcome the procedural roadblock.  The Republican traitors who crossed party lines on Wednesday were Senators Bob Bennett (UT), Sue Collins (ME), Judd Gregg (NH), Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Richard Lugar (IN) and Olympia Snowe (ME).

Dishonorable mention goes to Republican-turned-Democrat Senator Arlen Specter (PA) who voted for Sunstein — as well as Senator Mark Pryor (D-AR), who waited until the end of the voting period to finally cast his ballot against Sunstein.

Regarding Pryor, you will remember that in August, he waited until the last minute to cast his vote in favor of the concealed carry reciprocity amendment.  When it became clear the anti-gunners had a comfortable margin of victory, Sen. Pryor actually switched his vote at the last minute.

GOA members will be receiving a newsletter soon that shows an actual picture of the Senate tally sheet, which documents Pryor’s vote switch.  (Not receiving GOA’s newsletter?  Click here and become a GOA member today!)

The cloture vote on Wednesday — ending the filibuster on Sunstein — was 63-35.  You can see how your two Senators voted on the filibuster and on final passage by going to the GOA Vote Tracking section.

As the Regulatory Czar, Sunstein will provide the final touches on new federal regulations.  No firearm or ammunition needs to be banned outright — that would be too transparent.  As the coauthor of Nudge (2008), Sunstein has already laid out how “choice architects” should carefully guide (or nudge) Americans into making better choices.

So with a little regulation here … a little regulation there … Sunstein can strengthen the iron fist of the federal gun police (otherwise known as the BATFE).  Or, he can implement additional federal requirements which will result in firearm and ammunition manufacturers paying more for their merchandise.

Of course, these costs will be passed on to the consumer as new “taxes” that will “nudge” Americans away from purchasing firearms or engaging in the shooting sports.

In short, be prepared for more “change” from Washington and less spare change in your pockets.

Be vigilant about BATFE spying!

GOA has received a report from a very well-known journalist at a big newspaper that the FBI and BATFE are teaming up together to get off-the-record information on gun owners.  The project, known as Vigilant Eagle, involves federal agents going to gun stores and doing “meet and greets” with shop owners in the hopes of obtaining informal information on people buying guns.

If you are a shop owner who is contacted by the FBI or BATFE as part of this program — or if you are a gun owner who becomes aware that this program is going on in your area — please contact GOA by clicking here and giving us the details of what you know.  The journalist wants to run a story exposing Vigilant Eagle to the entire country.

MAIG: Bloomberg Follies

September 12, 2009
Gun Owners Tell Mayors The Truth About “Mayors Against Illegal Guns”
Friday, September 11, 2009

When New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Boston Mayor Thomas Menino–both virulently anti-gun mayors–formed a new anti-gun group a few years ago, they envisioned the creation of a powerful force to lobby for new gun control laws.  But in assembling their coalition, they failed to take two important things into account:  first, the response of gun owners to this new threat, and second, that many mayors would not take kindly to being misled regarding the real purpose of Mayors Against Illegal Guns (MAIG.)

Over the past few years, even as they continue to claim they are only concerned with “illegal” guns, MAIG has worked to impose new restrictions on law-abiding gun owners by regulating guns shows, supporting reckless lawsuits against the firearm industry, and opposing the right of self-defense for law-abiding Americans with carry permits.  Mayor Bloomberg, who sets the agenda for this radical group, is dedicated to the passage of highly restrictive gun laws. In an appearance on “Meet the Press,” Bloomberg announced that he would raise money to counter the influence of the NRA.

But there is a growing glitch in Bloomberg’s plan.  More and more mayors are discovering the real purpose of MAIG, and are removing their names from the group’s list.  After hearing from their constituents, over 40 mayors have resigned from the group since it’s inception.

A number of mayors have provided the same reason for leaving the group:  MAIG was not what they represented themselves to be.  In her letter of resignation, Mayor Patricia Shontz (R) of Madeira Beach, Florida wrote, “I am withdrawing because I believe the MAIG is attempting to erode all gun ownership, not just illegal guns.  Additionally, I have learned that the MAIG may be working on issues which conflict with legal gun ownership.”  She goes on to add, “It appears the MAIG has misrepresented itself to the Mayors of America and its citizens.  This is gun control, not crime prevention.”

Mayor Shontz’s concerns were echoed by Mayor Josh Nowotarski (D) of Mount Penn, Pennsylvania, who wrote, “I recently learned of the misrepresentations of the group and regret having joined in the first place.”

These sentiments were shared by a number of other mayors who have removed their name from the MAIG list.

Is your mayor a member MAIG?  Click here to find out.

If your mayor is listed, contact the Mayor’s office and let them know the truth about MAIG and ask them to resign.  If they say they are on the list in error, let them know they need to contact MAIG and have their name removed.  If your mayor agrees that MAIG is not a group that he or she wants to belong to, encourage your mayor to resign and let NRA-ILA know that they have done so.  Help your mayor make the right choice between protecting our Second Amendment rights or continuing to be associated with those who actively oppose and undermine your firearms freedom.

How to deal with Bankers and Big Government Types

September 9, 2009

This was just to good not to share. It addresses banks, but could easily be applied to Senators and such. In fact, I’m going to be sending it to all my representatives… Enjoy!

Shown below, is an actual letter that was sent to
A bank by an 86 year old woman. The bank manager thought it
Amusing enough to have it published in the New York Times.

Dear Sir:

I am writing to thank you for bouncing my check with
Which I endeavored to pay my plumber last month.

By my calculations, three nanoseconds must have
Elapsed between his presenting the check and the arrival in
My account of the funds needed to honor it.
I refer, of course, to the automatic monthly
Deposit of my entire pension, an arrangement which, I admit,
Has been in place for only eight years. You are to be
Commended for seizing that brief window of opportunity, and
Also for debiting my account $30 by way of penalty for the
Inconvenience caused to your bank. My thankfulness springs
From the manner in which this incident has caused me to
Rethink my errant financial ways.
I noticed that whereas I personally answer your
Telephone calls and letters, — when I try to contact you,
I am confronted by the impersonal, overcharging,
Pre-recorded, faceless entity which your bank has
Become.

From now on, I, like you, choose only to deal with
A flesh-and-blood person. My mortgage and loan
Repayments will therefore and hereafter no longer be
Automatic, but will arrive at your bank, by check, addressed
Personally and confidentially to an employee at your bank
Whom you must nominate.

Be aware that it is an offense under the Postal Act
For any other person to open such an envelope. Please find
Attached an Application Contact which I require your chosen
Employee to complete. I am sorry it runs to eight pages, but
In order that I know as much about him or her as your bank
Knows about me, there is no alternative. Please note that
All copies of his or her medical history must be countersigned by a Notary Public,
And the Mandatory details of his/her financial situation (income,
Debts, assets and liabilities) must be accompanied by
Documented proof. In due course, at MY convenience, I will
Issue your employee with a PIN number which he/she must
quote in dealings with me

I regret that it cannot be shorter than 28 digits
But, again, I have modeled it on the number of button
Presses required of me to access my account balance on your
Phone bank service. As they say, imitation is the sincerest
Form of flattery

Let me level the playing field even further

When you call me, press buttons as
Follows:
IMMEDIATELY AFTER DIALING, PRESS THE STAR (*)
BUTTON FOR ENGLISH
#1. To make an appointment to see me
#2. To query a missing payment.
#3. To transfer the call to my living room in case I am there
#4. To transfer the call to my bedroom in case I am sleeping
#5. To transfer the call to my toilet in case I am attending to nature.
#6. To transfer the call to my mobile phone if I am not at home
#7. To leave a message on my computer, a password
To access my computer is required. Password will be
Communicated to you at a later date to that Authorized
Contact mentioned earlier
#8. To return to the main menu and to listen to
Options 1 through 7
#9. To make a general complaint or inquiry. The
Contact will then be put on hold, pending the attention of
My automated answering service.
#10. This is a second reminder to press* for
English. While this may, on occasion, involve a lengthy
Wait, uplifting music will play for the duration of the Call

Regrettably, but again following your example, I
Must also levy an establishment fee to cover the setting up
Of this new arrangement. May I wish you a happy, if ever so
Slightly less prosperous New Year

Your Humble Client

(Remember: This was written by an 86 year old
Woman) ‘YA JUST GOTTA LOVE ‘ US SENIORS’ !!!!!

And remember: Don’t make old ladies mad. They
Don’t like being old in the first place, so it doesn’t take much to set them off



Yet another Czar: obamakooks

September 9, 2009

The impostor in chief is poised to yet again place an unelected ruler to laird it over us all. True to form, this new Czar is absolutely off the wall. Here’s a new twist; to go along with all the other “write your Congressperson / Senator letter campaigns.” No more Czars, period. Got it Senator? Is that simple and clear enough to be understood?  Where the hell is the NRA on this? Nothing in my live feed on it. Sold out again..? Read on…

Senate to Vote on Anti-gun Kook for ‘Regulatory Czar’
— Nominee favors bringing an end to hunting

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert
8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151
Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408
http://www.gunowners.org

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Just when you thought the news about the Obama administration couldn’t get any worse, gun owners find themselves needing to rally the troops once again.

This time it’s the proposed “Regulatory Czar” who will be coming to a vote this week in the U.S. Senate.

His name is Cass Sunstein, and he holds some of the kookiest views you will ever hear.

For starters, Sunstein believes in regulating hunting out of existence.  He told a Harvard audience in 2007 that “we ought to ban hunting.” And in The Rights of Animals: A Very Short Primer (2002), he said:

I think we should go further … the law should impose further regulation on hunting, scientific experiments, entertainment, and (above all) farming to ensure against unnecessary animal suffering.  It is easy to imagine a set of initiatives that would do a great deal here, and indeed European nations have moved in just this direction. There are many possibilities.  (Italics are his emphasis.)

If that’s all Sunstein believed, he would be dangerous and extreme, but not necessarily kooky.  Unfortunately, when you look at WHY he wants to restrict hunting, this is where he goes beyond extreme.

In Sunstein’s world, animals should have just as many rights as people … and they should be able to sue humans in court!

“We could even grant animals a right to bring suit without insisting that animals are persons, or that they are not property,” Sunstein said on page 11 of Animal Rights: Current Debates and New Directions (2004).

Well, that’s a relief … he is at least willing to concede that animals are not persons!  But he would still have animals suing humans, apparently, with more enlightened humans representing the cuddly critters.

Imagine returning from a successful hunting trip … only to find out that you’ve been subpoenaed for killing your prize.  Who knows, maybe Sunstein would have the family of the dead animal serving as witnesses in court!

By the way, if you’re wondering what he thinks about the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms, you won’t be surprised to know that Sunstein is a huge supporter of gun control.

In Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong for America (2005), Sunstein says:

Almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine…. [O]n the Constitution’s text, fundamentalists [that is, gun rights supporters] should not be so confident in their enthusiasm for invalidating gun control legislation.

Hmm, what part of “shall not be infringed” does Sunstein not understand?

Imagine the power that Sunstein could have as the Regulatory Czar — the nickname for the person heading the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) in the White House.

As the Regulatory Czar, he could bring about changes in the regulations that affect hunting, gun control and farming.  In short, he could make your life hell.

Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) objected to his nomination several weeks ago, preventing him from being unanimously confirmed.

That means that the Senate will now need to garner 60 votes to confirm this radical, kooky choice to the OIRA.

No doubt, many of the people our President wants to associate with are radical kooks.  First, there was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright … then there was the self-avowed communist (Van Jones) who was nominated for the Green Jobs Czar … now, there’s an extreme animal rights activist who wants to take away our guns and get Bambi to sue us in court.

It’s time to take a STRONG STAND against this radical administration.

ACTION: Please contact your Senators right away and urge them to vote AGAINST the Cass Sunstein nomination.  You can 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.

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Senator:

I urge you to vote AGAINST Cass Sunstein as the head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, as I am very concerned about the impact this “Regulatory Czar” would have upon firearms and hunting.

Sunstein told a Harvard audience in 2007 that “we ought to ban hunting.”  If that were all Sunstein believed, he would be dangerous and extreme, but not necessarily kooky.  Unfortunately, in Sunstein’s world, animals should have just as many rights as people … and they should be able to sue humans in court!

Moreover, he is a firm supporter of gun control.  In Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts are Wrong for America (2005), Sunstein says that, “Almost all gun control legislation is constitutionally fine.”

I wouldn’t be surprised if Sunstein is part of the small minority — 11% of Americans, according to a Zogby/O’Leary poll in August — who opposes licensed concealed carry.

I hope you will understand that Cass Sunstein’s views are WAY OUT OF THE MAINSTREAM of American thought and that you should vote NO on this radical, kooky nomination.

Sincerely,


The Larry Pratt News Hour (formerly Live Fire) is carried by the Information Radio Network on Saturdays (rebroadcasts Sundays). The show is simulcast on the web at http://irnusaradio.com/ and previous episodes are archived at http://irnusaradio.com/our-programs/live-fire with a number of listening formats, including podcasts, supported.

Recent guests and topics, among many others, have included:

* Jim Kouri — Police Against Socialized Medicine
* Aaron Zellman — No Guns for Negroes
* Hilmar von Campe — Former Hitler Youth on the Totalitarian Lie