Archive for the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ Category

Mexico, obama’s new residence for excuses

August 22, 2009

Last Sunday, the Mexican government fired 1,100 customs officials in a move to wipe out rampant corruption in the agency charged with securing the transport of goods and people across the U.S.-Mexican border. Army troops temporarily took control of the ports of entry (POE’s) along the 2,000-mile border.

Using more than 36,00 Mexican Army troops, President Felipe Calderon continues his war on the barbaric drug cartels that control and ravage much of Mexico. Last year, 5,600 people died at the hands of the cartels. The focus on the POE’s is not just the interdiction of human and drug smuggling but also of the flow of firearms into Mexico where they are tightly controlled. Calderon has complained frequently that guns from the United States provide the cartels with most of their firepower, though we have noted the dubious nature of this claim on more than one occasion.

During his visit to Mexico last week, Barack Obama praised Calderon’s efforts, but the Apologizer in Chief also readily blamed his own country for the violence. He pledged to dry up the flow of weapons into Mexico as well as to cut American demand for drugs. His strategy to stop the movement of guns includes reinstating (and, no doubt, enhancing) the 1994 ban on so-called “assault weapons” that expired in 2004. In addition, he promised an additional $1.6 billion for the Merida Initiative, a joint effort to fight against drug trafficking, money laundering and other crimes in Mexico and Central America.

But according to recent reports by the National Drug Intelligence Center, the Mexican cartels have been regulating “traffic” into and out of Mexico for some time, both at the POE’s and the virtually uncontrolled borderlands from San Ysidro, California to Brownsville, Texas. The problem always comes back to our wide-open border that four successive administrations have made little attempt to control. Calderon’s willingness to wage war on the cartels is truly admirable, but all things considered, it could end up as tilting at windmills.

SOURCE

Illinois style hopolophobia set to be the law of the land?

August 20, 2009

Illinois style hopolophobia set to be the law of the land? It sure appears headed that way. I have one thing to say to these black robed haters of liberty and freedom.

Molon Labe!

Read about this act of cowardice…

Appeals Court: Government Can Require Gun Registration

    Posted by Declan McCullagh

    (AP)

    An appeals court in Chicago has ruled that the federal, state or local government can require all citizens to register their firearms under penalty of law.

    A three-judge panel of the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals said that, even after the Supreme Court’s high-profile gun rights decision last year, the Second Amendment is no obstacle to mandatory gun registration.

    The case arose out of the Chicago-area town of Cicero’s mandatory registration requirement for firearms. A local man named John Justice was raided by the Cicero police on suspicion of violating business ordinances including improper storage of chemicals; the police discovered six unregistered handguns during the raid.

    Justice runs the Microcosm laminating company on 55th Ave., which sells special adhesives and does custom coatings for customers, and argued in a civil lawsuit that the local ordinance violated the Second Amendment. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Wednesday.

    Full Story

    Ritters Gun Tax: unalienable right to be taxed

    August 19, 2009

    Someday I will understand the whole “permit” and “taxing” or “fees” for unalienable rights by governments large and small.

    Please don’t misunderstand me. As I do support the various taxes on fishing and hunting gear that support the sports. But back door registration schemes as taxes..? Read on, and contact your Colorado State representatives.

    Click here to sign our Petition against Ritter’s Gun Tax!

    Though this idea has been rejected by both Republican and Democrat controlled legislatures, Ritter now claims it will bring $500 million to state coffers.
    “The Governor’s office is using estimates for firearms purchases based on recent purchase numbers, and it highly inflates the number,” said the Dudley Brown, the Executive Director of the largest pro-gun organization in Colorado, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.  Since the election of Barack Obama the number of firearms sales have skyrocketed across the nation.
    “But even with a smaller number, he’s forcing citizens who practice a constitutionally protected right to pay a tax first, much like the old Jim Crow laws,” said Brown.  “We don’t believe gun owners should have to ask permission to buy a firearm in the first place, and we’re now supposed to pay for their gun control?”
    Colorado uses a “Baby Brady” Registration system system to check purchasers’ backgrounds.  This puts gun owners in double jeopardy, since they must go through the FBI check as well as that of the Colorado Bureau of Investigation.  If Colorado’s Brady Act was repealed, the FBI would conduct Brady Registration Checks, which wouldn’t cost Colorado citizens and would shorten the wait time to 30 seconds — as opposed to CBI checks, which often take hours.
    “Now, Governor Ritter wants to put a tax on that registration as well.  He might just as well repeal our State Constitution’s protections,” said Brown, “since they don’t seem to matter to him.”
    Colorado’s Brady Act was passed in 2000 under a Republican-controlled legislature and Governor.

    Click here to sign our Petition against Ritter’s Gun Tax!

    Forward email

    “President Obama is the real target of health care protesters, not policy”

    August 17, 2009

    The left wing puff piece in the New York Daily News is one of the absolutely most poorly written editorials that I have ever read. It’s so full of innuendo and name calling that I thought for a moment I was reading the Daily Kos blog. Not a real newspaper where people are supposed to have the literary skills requisite for sharing ideas based in substance.

    Read the rag here.

    As for the article? It is so far off base that I am of the impression that the writer is on the White House staff…

    Contrast the above article with this one.

    Bloomberg Wants to “Counter” the NRA

    August 15, 2009

    It’s bad enough when, under color of authority, one commits federal felony’s (attempting to set up straw purchases; denying civil liberties under color of authority) while at the same time using armed body guards is a hallmark of elitist ideology; Now Bloomberg has the gall to go after those that seek liberty and freedom. Read on…

    It is old news to gun owners that New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg is not a friend. As one of the leading proponents of new gun laws, Bloomberg has already earned his place in the Second Amendment rights hall of shame. But apparently, Hizzoner does not believe he is doing enough to destroy our rights.

    On an appearance on “Meet the Press,” Bloomberg announced that he would raise money to counter the influence of the NRA. Bloomberg was on the show to trumpet the 39 votes he was able to muster to squeak out a narrow defeat of national Right-to-Carry reciprocity. (To read more about the Thune/Vitter amendment, click here.) He took the opportunity to lament that the NRA has so much influence — and took upon himself the role of countering that influence.

    Of course, as anti-gunners regularly do, Bloomberg ignores the fact that the NRA only has clout because we represent the beliefs of tens of millions of Americans who oppose the anti-gun agenda. Recent polling has repeatedly shown that the majority of Americans support the individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms.

    And though it must be very frustrating to mayor Bloomberg, that support is growing. A recent poll by Zogby International revealed that 83% of Americans support Right-to-Carry laws. Bloomberg will no doubt continue to trumpet the 39-vote procedural “victory,” but the reality is, the American people are on the side of Second Amendment freedoms.

    Perhaps part of the problem is the inherent dishonesty of Bloomberg’s position. He claims to be opposed to “Illegal” guns, but his latest effort targeted the rights of law-abiding people who already carry a gun legally. To Bloomberg, any gun he does not like is an “illegal” gun.

    Mayor Bloomberg and his group “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” represent a serious threat because of the attention the media will give them and the resources a billionaire like Bloomberg has at his disposal. That’s the money he is once again promising to use to fight against our Second Amendment rights.

    Fortunately, America’s law-abiding gun owners know how to fight the misinformation and anti-gun rhetoric of Mayor Bloomberg and his allies. NRA will continue to closely monitor Bloomberg’s anti-gun activities and will keep you informed about his efforts.

    SOURCE

    Ninth Circuit to Hear Gun Case

    August 8, 2009

    Second Amendment: Ninth Circuit to Hear Gun Case

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit agreed this week to review en banc (by the full court) a panel ruling from earlier this year which held that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment. The idea of such incorporation has long been a question regarding the Second Amendment, though no one would seriously question that the First Amendment, for example, applies to state and local governments. And the First Amendment contains the far more specific provision of “Congress shall make no law…” (emphasis added). The Second is far broader: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Still, we were rather surprised to see even a panel of the Ninth Circuit find that the Second Amendment means what it says.

    Furthermore, Ninth Circuit Judge Diarmuid O’Scannlain’s ruling in favor of gun rights is at odds with rulings by other Courts of Appeal — including a ruling penned by Sonia Sotomayor on the Second Circuit. The U.S. Supreme Court deliberately left the issue for another day in its Heller ruling last year, because the District of Columbia is not a state. Expect that silence to be broken in the not-too-distant future.

    SOURCE

    Mack Daddy’s fan club…

    August 7, 2009

    So many times people on the web are branded racist’s, or misogynist, or whatever because of political correctness by those that are ruled by their politics rather than any sort of rational logic.

    Never mind that they speak the words that so many are afraid to say. Tracy at No Compromise, Texas Fred, and Romantic Poet come to mind, not to mention Pamela at Atlas shrugs, and Anthony at The Liberty Sphere.

    What these good people attempt to communicate is not a thing of hatred, as they are so often portrayed to be doing. But one of love; for this nation, it’s traditions, and yes, it’s people.

    Guess what? They are not alone, and not all of their supporters are white. Today while surfing around the web I came across an allied site and one heck of an inspirational speaker, and no, he is not at all white.

    Check out this man here.

    Senate Confirms Radical Anti-gunner to the U.S. Supreme Court

    August 6, 2009

    We knew this was coming. Now, we need to see to it that anyone that voted for her is out of a job.

    Senate Confirms Radical Anti-gunner to the U.S. Supreme Court
    — But Obama nomination suffers a higher than normal number of opposition votes

    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

    Thursday, August 6, 2009

    The Senate easily confirmed the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the U.S. Supreme Court.  Only 31 Senators took seriously their oath to uphold the Constitution and voted against this radical anti-gun nominee, with 68 voting for confirmation.

    All the Democrats in attendance voted for Sotomayor, while nine Republicans joined their ranks.

    The Republican Senators who voted for Sotomayor were:  Lamar Alexander of Tennessee, Christopher Bond of Missouri, Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, Mel Martinez of Florida, George Voinovich of Ohio and Susan Collins and Olympia J. Snowe of Maine.

    Many Democrat Senators campaigned on a pro-Second Amendment platform, yet voted to confirm a nominee who does not believe you have a fundamental right to self defense or an individual right to possess a firearm.

    Placing the prerogatives of President Obama over their constitutional “Advice and Consent” duty, many so-called pro-gun Senators reneged on their promises to voters that they would support the individual right to keep and bear arms.

    The common refrain heard in the Senate before the vote was:  “The President deserves his pick.”

    Of course, Senator Barrack Obama did not hold that view in 2006, when he opposed President Bush’s pick of Samuel Alito to the Supreme Court.  Then-Senator Obama said:

    There are some who believe that the President, having won the election, should have the complete authority to appoint his nominee, and the Senate should only examine whether or not the Justice is intellectually capable and an all-around nice guy. That once you get beyond intellect and personal character, there should be no further question whether the judge should be confirmed.

    I disagree with this view. I believe firmly that the Constitution calls for the Senate to advise and consent. I believe that it calls for meaningful advice and consent that includes an examination of a judge’s philosophy, ideology, and record.

    Thankfully, we are seeing more and more Senators stand up to Obama’s radical agenda.  You will remember that GOA encouraged you to lobby other gun groups so that gun owners across the country could speak with a unified voice in opposition to Judge Sotomayor.

    We were hugely successful in this endeavor!  News reports credit the gun lobby’s strong and unified opposition to Sotomayor as resulting in at least three NO votes from Senators who were previously undecided or in favor of the nominee. Even that figure is probably low, considering that 31 NO votes is a lot better than three NO votes (in the case of Justice Ginsburg) and nine NO votes (in the case of Justice Breyer).

    One of the fence-sitting Senators who voted right today was Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah.  For the first time in his 33 year Senate career, Hatch voted against a Supreme Court nomination.  You may remember that Hatch even supported Obama’s pick for Attorney General and voted to end the filibuster on Harold Koh, the radical choice for the State Department counsel.

    But faced with mounting pressure from grassroots in his state, Sen. Hatch broke with long-standing tradition regarding his support for Supreme Court nominations.  Today, he voted against Judge Sotomayor.

    “I feel very badly that I have to vote negatively — it’s not what I wanted to do when this process started — but I believe that I’m doing the honorable and right thing,” Sen. Hatch was quoted as saying in Newsday.

    Thank you, everyone, for putting the heat on your Senators.  President Obama would do well to interpret 31 NO votes as a “shot across the bow.”  With his approval ratings plummeting, the president’s next Supreme Court pick may have to be far more in the mainstream.

    Propaganda from the DNC

    August 6, 2009

    Hat tip to Pamela at Atlas Shrugs for this: see the sidebar.

    PSYOP ALERT: The Deceiver in Chief Calls Out his Mobs, Attempts to Manufacture Support in Face of True Opposition

    Wow, Obama really thinks the American people are scum. Yesterday, he dared to say that the true American phenomena of tea parties, town halls, and protests are “manufactured” by the GOP (we wish!), big money (where, what, who?  – we have no dough! Soros, call your office – in the West wing) and the RNC (that suit Steele? don’t make me laugh).





    Further, Obama is urging Americans to snitch, rat out their neighbors, if they don’t like Obama’s policies. What will O do with this info, apart from an obvious enemies list? I think they want to know where the rallies are, where the tea parties are, so that they can send their ACORN army goons to start trouble. That’s what I think.

    Today Obamao manufactures support for his rout of healthcare, energy and education. Here is the letter he sent to the O-bot army.

    Friend —

    This is the moment our movement was built for.

    For one month, the fight for health insurance reform leaves the backrooms of Washington, D.C., and returns to communities across America. Throughout August, members of Congress are back home, where the hands they shake and the voices they hear will not belong to lobbyists, but to people like you.

    Home is where we’re strongest. We didn’t win last year’s election together at a committee hearing in D.C. We won it on the doorsteps and the phone lines, at the softball games and the town meetings, and in every part of this great country where people gather to talk about what matters most. And if you’re willing to step up once again, that’s exactly where we’re going to win this historic campaign for the guaranteed, affordable health insurance that every American deserves.

    There are those who profit from the status quo, or see this debate as a political game, and they will stop at nothing to block reform. They are filling the airwaves and the internet with outrageous falsehoods to scare people into opposing change. And some people, not surprisingly, are getting pretty nervous. So we’ve got to get out there, fight lies with truth, and set the record straight.

    That’s why Organizing for America is putting together thousands of events this month where you can reach out to neighbors, show your support, and make certain your members of Congress know that you’re counting on them to act.

    But these canvasses, town halls, and gatherings only make a difference if you turn up to knock on doors, share your views, and show your support. So here’s what I need from you:

    Can you commit to join at least one event in your community this month?

    In politics, there’s a rule that says when you ask people to get involved, always tell them it’ll be easy. Well, let’s be honest here: Passing comprehensive health insurance reform will not be easy. Every President since Harry Truman has talked about it, and the most powerful and experienced lobbyists in Washington stand in the way.

    But every day we don’t act, Americans watch their premiums rise three times faster than wages, small businesses and families are pushed towards bankruptcy, and 14,000 people lose their coverage entirely. The cost of inaction is simply too much for the people of this nation to bear.

    So yes, fixing this crisis will not be easy. Our opponents will attack us every day for daring to try. It will require time, and hard work, and there will be days when we don’t know if we have anything more to give. But there comes a moment when we all have to choose between doing what’s easy, and doing what’s right.

    This is one of those times. And moments like this are what this movement was built for. So, are you ready?

    Please commit now to taking at least one action in your community this month to build support for health insurance reform:

    http://www.facebook.com/l/;my.barackobama.com/CommitAugust

    Let’s seize this moment and win this historic victory for our economy, our health and our families.

    Barack Hussein Obama

    UPDATE: Yes, girls and boys, there’s more. And what is the party of America haters and destroyers saying about the patriots who are standing up to fight for their country, their rights and the rights of the individual? Check this out from the Democrat National Committee:

    There’s been a lot of media coverage about organized mobs intimidating lawmakers, disrupting town halls, and silencing real discussion about the need for real health insurance reform.

    The truth is, it’s a sham. These “grassroots protests” are being organized and largely paid for by Washington special interests and insurance companies who are desperate to block reform. They’re trying to use lies and fear to break the President and his agenda for change.

    Health insurance reform is about our lives, our jobs, and our families — we can’t let distortions and intimidation get in the way. We need to expose these outrageous tactics, and we’re counting on you to help. Can you read these “5 facts about the anti-reform mobs,” then pass them along to your friends and family?

    5 facts about the anti-reform mobs

    1. These disruptions are being funded and organized by out-of-district special-interest groups and insurance companies who fear that health insurance reform could help Americans, but hurt their bottom line. A group run by the same folks who made the “Swiftboat” ads against John Kerry is compiling a list of congressional events in August to disrupt. An insurance company coalition has stationed employees in 30 states to track where local lawmakers hold town-hall meetings.

    2. People are scared because they are being fed frightening lies. These crowds are being riled up by anti-reform lies being spread by industry front groups that invent smears to tarnish the President’s plan and scare voters. But as the President has repeatedly said, health insurance reform will create more health care choices for the American people, not reduce them. If you like your insurance or your doctor, you can keep them, and there is no “government takeover” in any part of any plan supported by the President or Congress.

    3. Their actions are getting more extreme. Texas protesters brought signs displaying a tombstone for Rep. Lloyd Doggett and using the “SS” symbol to compare President Obama’s policies to Nazism. Maryland Rep. Frank Kratovil was hanged in effigy outside his district office. Rep. Tim Bishop of New York had to be escorted to his car by police after an angry few disrupted his town hall meeting — and more examples like this come in every day. And they have gone beyond just trying to derail the President’s health insurance reform plans, they are trying to “break” the President himself and ruin his Presidency.

    4. Their goal is to disrupt and shut down legitimate conversation. Protesters have routinely shouted down representatives trying to engage in constructive dialogue with voters, and done everything they can to intimidate and silence regular people who just want more information. One attack group has even published a manual instructing protesters to “stand up and shout” and try to “rattle” lawmakers to prevent them from talking peacefully with their constituents.

    5. Republican leadership is irresponsibly cheering on the thuggish crowds. Republican House Minority Leader John Boehner issued a statement applauding and promoting a video of the disruptions and looking forward to “a long, hot August for Democrats in Congress.”

    It’s time to expose this charade, before it gets more dangerous. Please send these facts to everyone you know. You can also post them on your website, blog, or Facebook page.

    Now, more than ever, we need to stand strong together and defend the truth.

    Thanks,

    Jen

    Jen O’Malley Dillon
    Executive Director
    Democratic National Committee

    Hopolophobia: Here they come again…

    August 5, 2009
    After years of losing, gun control advocates say this week’s vote on confirming Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court will be their long awaited win that shatters conventional wisdom and proves that the Second Amendment is no longer the unstoppable force of Washington politics.
    Read About It: The Washington Times
    SOURCE
    Followed by this:
    President Obama’s choice to head the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs had Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, so upset that he blocked it a move that puts only a temporary hold on the appointment.

    Read About It: The Washington Times
    SOURCE
    Then follow all that up with …
    Zogby/O’Leary asked voters: “Would you support or oppose a U.S. Senator who voted to confirm a Justice to the U.S. Supreme Court who does not believe in the right to keep and bear arms and the right to self-defense?” Fifty-two percent of American voters would oppose the re-election of any Senator who votes to confirm a Supreme Court nominee who does not believe in the right to keep and bear arms. Only 26 percent of voters would support such a Senator.
    Read About It: The O’Leary Report
    It’s been a busy day to be sure. Have you thanked God or a Veteran for your liberty today?