All politics are local…

January 24, 2012

It has been said time and time again that all politics are local. While that may be true to a certain extent it’s not necessarily true across the board. Just take a look at the dog and pony show that is the ongoing Republican process for the nomination for President…

There is nearly always some sort of dirt going on at the local levels of government, and it is virtually always by establishment types to ensure that they maintain control. Here in Wyoming right now there is a move underway to remove voter supported gadfly’s via the redistricting. That means cutting the districts up so that only “approved” people will get elected.

Sure, the law requires things to be reassessed every ten years. However, this is often used by one faction or another to further their particular agenda. One example might be a faction that favors more taxation in this or that application. Remember, The Taxed Enough Already movement was started with local control in mind, and that didn’t simply mean keeping a tight rein on our Congressmen. Think about the discussion at the federal levels right now about tax rates. Then take a look at all your local taxes, including the local and state taxes that are thinly disguised as “user fees.”

Then take a look at the locally elected folks, and just what they really stand for? How many really stand up for the State or Federal Constitution? How many have proposed the lifting of one law when ever another law is placed on the books? How many have proposed any law that places more freedom and liberty in the hands of those that have to live with these laws..? How many of them think that a citizen is going overboard, or being a threat when all they are doing is acting according to their rights under the law, and then act to change the law so that they “feel” better about things? The recent fiasco about carrying a gun in Casper at the council meetings is a great example of things along those lines.

Wyoming has been called the equality state, and for good reason. However, creeping misandry / mysandry, hoplophobia,and political correctness are changing the face of things here, and not for the better. What can be done about this change of the states social and political personality?

People need to become more involved, period. Putting your name out front, and calling out your local representatives when they go over to the dark side. At meetings, on the internet, and even on the sidewalks when the occasion presents itself. Get active, publicly with those organizations that really do stand up for all of our rights, and call out those that only pretend to do so on their hypocrisy.

We need a “Tar & Feather Brigade” so to speak that simply will not back down or compromise away our deepest values.

Related articles

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Immigration, Law, Local Politics Wyoming, mysandry, News, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

A Victory for Individual Privacy in the Supreme Court

January 24, 2012

 

The Supreme Court yesterday unanimously sided with Gun Owners of America in finding that the placement of a Global Positioning Device on an automobile constitutes a “search” for purposes of the Fourth Amendment.
The majority opinion in U.S. v. Jones was written by Justice Antonin Scalia and follows GOA’s reasoning to throw out the “reasonable expectation of privacy” test which has been thought to be the dominant Fourth Amendment standard in recent years.
The Obama Administration argued that because the police could theoretically follow Antoine Jones’ car, he had no “reasonable expectation of privacy,” and thus, placing a GPS device on his car was justified. GOA argued, however, that this constituted an “unreasonable search and seizure” which violates the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.
This decision will have dramatic ramifications for gun owners. Indeed, the Court looked to the Founders’ intentions with respect to the Fourth Amendment, which, until the latter part of the 20th Century, was understood to restrict the ability of police to “trespass” upon the persons or property of Americans.
“This is no less than a fundamental transformation of American jurisprudence concerning searches and seizures,” according to GOA’s Executive Director Larry Pratt. “And it is a transformation which throws out fake modern jurisprudence and restores the Founders’ intent.”
The “reasonable expectation of privacy” test flowed from a Justice Harlan concurring opinion in Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967). Gun Owners of America had argued that the Supreme Court should jettison that decision by an activist court, and a majority of the justices agreed.
“The ‘expectation of privacy’ test for searches and seizures arose without support in the text or historical context of the Fourth Amendment, and has proven wholly inadequate to protect the American people from their government,” argued GOA.
Four members of the court — led by Samuel Alito, and joined by Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, and Elena Kagan — argued for the continuation of the “reasonable expectation of privacy test,” but concluded that planting a GPS device on a car for 28 days constituted a Fourth Amendment “search” under that standard as well.
The Obama administration, which had argued that planting a GPS device on a car was not a “search” under the Harlan standard, was unanimously repudiated by the High Court. And the case is being cited by the mainstream media as a defeat for Obama and his Justice Department, which is led by Attorney General Eric Holder.
Said Pratt: “This is yet another failure by Eric Holder, the most corrupt and incompetent Attorney General in the history of the Republic.”
Gun Owners would like to thank its activists for their support. Your contributions helps GOA to assist in future cases like this at the Supreme Court.

SOURCE
Related articles

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

“arbitrary or capricious,” without any doubt!

January 23, 2012
Federal Court Supports Illegal Obama Multiple Sales Regs
First, the good news: Fox News is reporting that due to an amazing outpouring of opposition, the vote on the so-called anti-piracy legislation — which could muzzle websites like GOA’s — has been postponed. Thank you all for your activism … and please stay tuned to further updates on this issue.
Now for the bad news: You know what they say about Friday the 13th.
Well, this past Friday, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a setback to gun owners. The issue involved a lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s illegal multiple sales regulations. [NSSF v. Jones, Acting Director, BATFE.]
Through those regulations, Obama has demanded, by regulatory fiat, that firearms licensees in four southwestern states report multiple sales of certain long guns to the federal government.
In upholding this action, Judge Rosemary Collyer -– a Bush appointee! –- ignored the Constitution, the Supreme Court’s decision in the Heller case, and the clear language of federal law.
Of course, this once again underscores the danger of putting all our eggs in the “court basket.” It’s not a bad idea to challenge unconstitutional measures in the courts, but it’s problematic if we look to them as being the ultimate defenders of our gun rights. Clearly, they are not.
Among other things, Judge Collyer ignored the obvious language of the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Act, which prohibits the ATF from demanding any information on gun owners other than information explicitly allowed by statute.
Specifically, the section states: “Such [licensees] shall not be required to submit to the Attorney General reports and information with respect to such records and the contents thereof, except as expressly required by this section.” (18 U.S.C. 923(g)(1))
Paragraph (g)(5) allows the Attorney General to demand information by issuing a “demand letter,” but participants in the drafting of McClure-Volkmer affirm that this was not intended to trump the paragraph (1) limitation, in order to statutorily mandate reporting requirements.
To interpret paragraph (g)(5), as Obama and Attorney General Holder have interpreted it, is to say that there are NO limits on the information the Attorney General can demand -– up to and including every 4473 in the country.
In opening this door, Collyer cited much narrower decisions in the Fourth and the liberal Ninth Circuit, but expanded them beyond any judicial precedent. Citing a test that looked at whether the ATF’s action constituted a “clear error of judgment” or was “arbitrary or capricious,” Collyer gave all of the benefit of the doubt to Obama -– and none to the Second Amendment, which wasn’t even considered in her 21-page opinion.
The decision will presumably be appealed to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals -– a supposedly “conservative” circuit that nevertheless upheld ObamaCare.
But the larger issue is this: Congress can block these regulations by simply cutting off the money to implement them. Last fall, we demanded that the House include such a prohibition in its giant money bill. But congressional leaders ignored the Second Amendment community on this and a variety of other pro-gun issues, including defunding ObamaCare.
It is late in the game. But there is still an opportunity to prohibit funding for the multiple sales regulations on the annual Department of Justice Appropriations bill and the “continuing resolution” which will inevitably follow around September 30.
True, a lot of damage will have been done by that point. But we cannot allow to stand the precedent that the Attorney General can seize any and all gun-related information, simply by saying he wants it.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on “arbitrary or capricious,” without any doubt!

A History Lesson, so to speak…

January 19, 2012

I have a very good friend. His name is Leo, and I will leave it at that. he follows the blog, and will reveal his full name if he so chooses to do so.

Leo, is a genuine all American BAD ASS.  In the Viet Nam War Leo did his duty, and then some. Three, count them three Bronze Stars with “V” Device, as well as a Silver Star. He also picked up a couple of Purple Mary’s along the way. He pulled a woman and her two kids out of a canal in Georgia I think it was. That had run off the road, and were in danger of drowning. He took a hit in the lower leg from a Water Moccasin in the process. That tagged him with “The Soldiers Medal.” He’s also got a Combat Infantry Badge with? Three stars for God’s sakes! Leo, is / was an AIRBORNE RANGER!

Which brings me too the point of this post. Leo and I were talking one day and the subject of slavery came up. I received one hell of an education that day. Oh, I somehow forgot to mention that Leo, is a Black Man…

What follows, is stolen from my good friend Texas Fred. It is a review of the dressing down that I received from Leo that day.

Here in Texas we take our holidays, traditions and heritage quite seriously.

Confederate Heroes Day in Texas

Confederate Heroes Day is a Texas State Holiday created by Chapter 221, Senate Bill 60, of the 63rd Texas Legislature. Approved June 1, 1973 and Effective August 27, 1973, this bill deleted June 3rd as a holiday for Jefferson Davis’ birthday and combined it with Robert E. Lee’s Birthday, January 19th. It is the last holiday in the State of Texas dedicated to Confederate Veterans. We as “Sons of Confederate Veterans” are dedicate to the preservation of this holiday, the defense of the Confederate soldier’s good name, the guardianship of his history, the emulation of his virtues, the perpetuation of those principles which he loved and which we love also, and those ideals which made him glorious. We celebrate this day in remembrance of those gallant individuals who bravely defended their families and their homeland in the war for southern independence. SOURCE

350x314px

Some say we fly the Confederate Flag because we are racists and haters. Those people are what I like to call WRONG. Hatred and racism have NOTHING to do with pride and our heritage.

I grow frustrated by those that insist the War Between the States was a war fought over the issue of slavery, it was not. Many still refer to it as The War of Northern Aggression.

So, let us examine some Confederate history, MYTH vs FACTS, and a bit of REAL history concerning those many myths as they are properly taken to task in the following:

History books, the media, the school systems, etc abound in falsehoods and inaccuracies of Confederate and Southern history. This fact sheet will help to clarify and dispel some of these rampant inaccuracies.

MYTH – The War of 1861 – 1865 was fought over slavery.

FACT – Terribly untrue. The North fought the war over money. Plain and simple. When the South started Secession, Lincoln was asked, “Why not let the South go in peace?” To which he replied, “I can’t let them go. Who would pay for the government?” Sensing total financial ruin for the North, Lincoln waged war on the South. The South fought the War to repel Northern aggression and invasion.

MYTH– Only Southerners owned slaves.

FACT– Entirely untrue. Many Northern civilians owned slaves. Prior to, during and even after the War Of Northern Aggression.

Surprisingly, to many history impaired individuals, most Union Generals and staff had slaves to serve them! William T. Sherman had many slaves that served him until well after the war was over and did not free them until late in 1865.

U.S. Grant also had several slaves, who were only freed after the 13th amendment in December of 1865. When asked why he didn’t free his slaves earlier, Grant stated “Good help is so hard to come by these days.”

Contrarily, Confederate General Robert E. Lee freed his slaves (which he never purchased – they were inherited) in 1862!!! Lee freed his slaves several years before the war was over, and considerably earlier than his Northern counterparts. And during the fierce early days of the war when the South was obliterating the Yankee armies!

Lastly, and most importantly, why did NORTHERN States outlaw slavery only AFTER the war was over? The so-called “Emancipation Proclamation” of Lincoln only gave freedom to slaves in the SOUTH! NOT in the North! This pecksniffery even went so far as to find the state of Delaware rejecting the 13th Amendment in December of 1865 and did not ratify it (13th Amendment / free the slaves) until 1901!

MYTH– The Confederate Battle Flag was flown on slave ships.

FACT– NONE of the flags of the Confederacy or Southern Nation ever flew over a slave ship. Nor did the South own or operate any slaves ships. The English, the Dutch and the Portuguese brought slaves to this country, not the Southern Nation.

BUT, even more monumental, it is also very important to know and understand that Federal, Yankee, Union ships brought slaves to America! These ships were from the New England states, and their hypocrisy is atrocious.

These Federals were ones that ended up crying the loudest about slavery. But without their ships, many of the slaves would have never arrived here. They made countless fortunes on the delivery of slaves as well as the products made from raw materials such as cotton and tobacco in the South.

This is the problem with Yankee history. History is overwhelmingly portrayed incorrectly by most of the Federal & Yankee books and media.

MYTH– The Confederate Battle Flag represented the Southern Nation.

FACT– Not true. While the Southern Battle flag was carried into battle, the Southern Nation had 3 different National flags during the course of the war.

The First National flag was changed due to a resemblance of the US flag.

The Second National flag was subsequently modified due to the similarity to a flag of truce.

The Third National flag was the adopted flag of the Confederacy.

The Confederate Battle Flag was never a National Flag of the Confederacy. It was carried into battle by several armies such as the Army Of Northern Virginia and the Army of Tennessee. Was also used as a Naval Jack by the Confederate Navy.

MYTH– The Confederate Battle Flag is known as the “Stars & Bars”.

FACT– A common misconception. The First National Confederate Flag is correctly known as the “Stars & Bars”. The Confederate Battle Flag is known as the “Southern Cross”.

MYTH– The Confederate Battle Flag represents racism today.

FACT– The Confederate Battle Flag today finds itself in the center of much controversy and hoopla going on in several states. The cry to take this flag down is unjustified. It is very important to keep in mind that the Confederate Battle Flag was simply just that. A battle flag. It was never even a National flag, so how could it have flown over a slave nation or represented slavery or racism? This myth is continued by lack of education and ignorance. Those that vilify the Confederate Battle Flag are very confused about history and have jumped upon a bandwagon with loose wheels.

MYTH– The United States Flag represented freedom.

FACT– No chance. The US flag flew over a slave nation for over 85 years! The North tolerated slavery and acknowledged it as a Division Of Labor. The North made a vast fortune on slavery and it’s commodities. It wasn’t until the South decided to leave the Union that the North objected. The North knew it could not survive without the Southern money. That is the true definition of hypocrisy.

MYTH– Abraham Lincoln was the Great Emancipator.

FACT– While Lincoln has went down in history as the Great Emancipator, many would not care to hear his real thoughts on people of color. Martyred President Abraham Lincoln was fervently making plans to send all freed slaves to the jungles of Central America once the war was over. Knowing that African society would never allow the slaves to return back to Africa, Lincoln also did not want the slaves in the US. He thought the jungles of Central America would be the best solution and conducive to the freed slaves best interest. The only thing that kept this from happening, was his assassination.

MYTH– The South revered slavery.

FACT– A very interesting fact on slavery is that at the time the War of 1861 -1865 officially commenced, the Southern States were actually in the process of freeing all slaves in the South. Russia had freed it’s servants in 1859, and the South took great note of this. Had military intervention not been forced upon the South, a very different America would have been realized then as well as now.

MYTH– The Confederate Army was comprised of rich slave owners.

FACT– Very far from true. The vast majority of soldiers in the Confederate Army were simple men of meager income. Most of which were hard working farmers and common men. Then, as now, very few rich men ever fight a war.

MYTH– Only the North had men of color in their ranks.

FACT– Quite simply a major falsehood of history. Many blacks, both free and of their own will, joined the Confederate Army to fight for their beloved Southern home. Additionally, men of other ethnic extraction fought as well. Oriental, Mexican & Spanish men as well as Native American Indians fought with pride for the South.

Today, many men of color are members in the heritage group SCV – Sons Of Confederate Veterans. These men of color and pride rejoice in their heritage. The continued attacks on the Southern Nation, The Confederacy, and her symbols are a terrible outrage to these fine people. These attacks should be denounced with as much fervor as those who denounce the South.

MYTH– The Confederate Flags are an authorized symbol of Aryan, KKK and hate groups.

FACT– Quite the contrary. These despicable organizations such as the KKK and Aryans have taken a hallowed piece of history, and have plagued good Southern folks and the memories of fine Confederate Soldiers that fought under the flag with their perverse agenda. IN NO WAY does the Confederate Flag represent hate or violence. Heritage groups such as the SCV battle daily the damage done to a proud nation by these hate groups. The SCV denounces all hate groups, and pridefully boast HERITAGE – NOT HATE.

MYTH– The SCV – Sons Of Confederate Veterans are a racist, hate group.

FACT– This is a blatant attack on one of the finest heritage groups ever. The SCV – Sons Of Confederate Veterans are a historical, patriotic and non-political organization comprised of descendants of Confederate Soldiers and sailors dedicated to insuring that a true history of the 1861 -1865 period is preserved and presented to the public. The SCV continues to educate the public of the memory and reputation of the Confederate soldier as well as the motives for his suffering and sacrifice.

The SCV – Sons Of Confederate Veterans are in NO WAY affiliated with, nor does it recognize or condone the terrible legacy of hate groups such as the KKK. SOURCE

You can’t get a much more comprehensive, in-depth explanation than that.

Photobucket

Additional Reading: Gen. Robert E. Lee: January 19, 1807 – October 12, 1870

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
 
This entry was posted in Confederate Heroes Day and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
Related articles

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Law, Men's Issues, Military Science, mysandry, News, Politics, States Rights, War, Warfare, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

“Constitutional Carry” (SB 25) for Colorado

January 19, 2012
State Senator Tim Neville, R-Littleton, has agreed to sponsor “Constitutional Carry” (SB 25) as his first bill in the 2012 Colorado state legislative session. What happens next is up to RMGO supporters like you.

If you haven’t done so already, please sign the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners petition in support of Constitutional Carry. Then, please forward this message to friends, family, and other like-minded citizens and ask them to sign the petition as well.

With the start of the 2012 session just days away it’s absolutely vital we turn up the heat on every member of the state legislature.

As you may know, this critical legislation will ensure honest gun owners their constitutional right to carry a concealed handgun without having to fight through the expensive government red tape of the permit process.

But will your State Senator and Representative stand up for your second amendment rights? Or will they bow down to the radical anti-gun lobby?

You see, with a liberal majority in the Colorado State Senate getting this bill out of committee won’t be an easy task.

That’s why Rocky Mountain Gun Owners is unveiling an ambitious program to promote Constitutional Carry in 2012.

With nearly 20 years in the fight to preserve our right to keep and bear arms at both the state and federal level, I will be the first to tell you, I can’t do this alone.

It takes patriots like you to continue the fight to allow every honest gun owner the ability to protect him or herself at all times.

This is why I’m asking you to stand up for our Second Amendment rights and sign the RMGO Constitutional Carry Petition.

Your signature will help us in the first part of our plan to collect at least 20,000 signed petitions to deliver to your State Senators and Representatives demanding that they support the Constitutional Carry bill.

Then, in a few weeks, we will introduce our candidate pledge; demanding that each and every member of the General Assembly — and every candidate — pledge to support Constitutional Carry in Colorado.

After you’ve signed RMGO’s Constitutional Carry Petition, please forward this message to as many Second Amendment supporters as possible, and encourage them to sign the petition, too!

And if you can, please consider chipping in $15 or $20.

Your generous contribution will help us really turn up the heat — through letters, phone calls, emails and internet ads . . .

. . . And if funding permits, RMGO will launch hard-hitting newspaper, radio and TV ads urging specific elected officials, by name, to vote to pass Constitutional Carry in Colorado.

You and I both know the gun grabbers and their leftist allies in the state legislature will pull every dirty trick.

Please do not delay signing the petition, and if you can please consider chipping in $15 or $20 to help RMGO fight to pass Constitutional Carry in Colorado.

Of course, if you can and want to contribute more, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners will be careful stewards of your trust.

As always, thank you for your support in the fight to preserve our Second Amendment Rights.

Only together can we do what can’t be done alone.

For freedom,

Dudley Brown
Executive Director, Rocky Mountain Gun Owners

P.S. State Senator Tim Neville is introducing Constitutional Carry in the 2012 Colorado state legislative session.

This critical legislation will ensure honest gun owners their constitutional right to carry a concealed handgun without having to fight through the expensive government red tape of the permit process.

From an email received from RMGO
Related articles

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, Local Politics Colorado, mysandry, News, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | 5 Comments »

Legislation could potentially shut down gun websites; Big Brother knows best…

January 18, 2012

Yet another attempt to control the free flow of information. Or is it the legitimate government function of enforcing laws against theft..?

I happen to agree with the principles involved, as far as theft of intellectual property goes. However, these laws, as proposed? No damned way period! Read on…

By now, you are no doubt aware that several websites have either gone totally or partially “dark” today in protest of the pernicious internet legislation that will be coming to a vote next week.  Wikipedia and Google are just two of the websites which are protesting in this manner.

And while you may have not paid much attention to this story, you need to know that the “muzzle the web” legislation these sites are protesting could also affect your ability to get gun-related information on websites like GOA’s.

The reason is that S. 968 could, in its final form, allow the Brady Campaign to partially shut down our GOA website and our organization (plus many other pro-gun websites) with a series of factually accurate, but legally frivolous complaints.

The Senate bill and its House counterpart have accurately been called “a direct attack on the underpinnings of the web.”

True, many of the most serious “gun problems” are in the House counterpart.  But the reality is this:  We are within a few votes of killing the whole concept next week in the Senate with only 41 Senate votes.

But if we allow the so-called “anti-piracy” bill to go forward on the HOPE that the worst provisions will not make it into the final version -– and we fail to eliminate them -– the bill may be unstoppable.

Here are the “gun problems,” as we see them:

Section 103(b)(1) of H.R. 3261 allows any “holder of an intellectual property right” to demand that PayPal and other payment and advertising services stop providing services to organizations like ours, thereby shutting off our income.

How would they do this?  Perhaps by arguing that we were stealing their intellectual property by quoting their lying misrepresentations in our alerts.

Is this legally frivolous?  Sure it is.  But the Brady Campaign is the King of Frivolous Complaints:

* Remember when the Brady Campaign asked the Federal Election Commission in 2007 to shut down GOA’s ability to post its candidate ratings on the Internet?  They claimed that we were in violation of the McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform Act.  Thankfully, the FEC ruled in GOA’s favor, thus enabling us to continue posting candidate ratings without restraint.

* Remember when the Brady Campaign got 36 state and local jurisdictions to bring frivolous lawsuits against gun manufacturers –- not in the expectation of winning, but to drain the resources of the manufacturers in order to halt the manufacture of guns in America?

This “muzzle the web” legislation will throw the doors open to even more frivolous complaints.  Could we defend ourselves?  Yes, we could.  We could file a counter notification under section 103(b)(5) and spend years defending ourselves.  But the one thing we did learn during the 36 frivolous lawsuits is that the anti-gun forces in America have very deep pockets.

And the other problem is that, under section 104, our Internet providers would be insulated from liability for shutting us down.  But they would receive no comparable insulation from legal liability if they refused to cut us off.

The Senate version, S. 968, has been amended, at the behest of Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley and others, to provide many protections which were not in its initial form.

Under section 3, the Attorney General would go to court and would have to claim that, because of a hyperlink to an offending site, we were “primarily” engaged in the theft of intellectual property.

We would feel a lot better about these protections if the Attorney General were not Eric Holder, a ruthless ideologue who has demonstrated that he will go to any lengths to destroy the Second Amendment.

So the bottom line is this:  H.R. 3261 and S. 968

would potentially empower the Brady Campaign and Eric Holder to go after our Internet site.  To do so, they would have to make the same frivolous arguments and engage in the same lawless activity that they have done so often in the past.

But -– given that we’re within a few votes of snuffing out that risk by killing the bill in the Senate -– we believe it’s the better course of action to do so.

Click here to contact your senators.

SOURCE

Related articles

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, News, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Legislation could potentially shut down gun websites; Big Brother knows best…

* Here’s something to think about.*

January 15, 2012

Got this from a friend.

 

What others see plainly, we often ignore.

* Here’s something to think about.*

I remember asking dad about Castro when I was about 9 years old. I asked, “Is Castro a good guy or bad?”

Dad said…he couldn’t tell!! This was about 1955. We were living in Louisiana …at the time. Dad was in the Army there.

Cuba was fairly close and in the news a lot. The Cubans were asking the same question! Ike was president.

This past July, we had the pleasure of sharing a summer barbecue with a refugee from Cuba . Our dinner conversation was starkly different than most.

This refugee came to the United States as a young boy in the early 1960’s. His family was more fortunate than most, as they were able to
bring a suitcase…and $100 when they fled Castro’s newly formed revolutionary paradise.

Our dinner consisted of all-American fare: hamburgers, potato salad, watermelon and fresh ears of sweet corn. This is a menu shared with family and friends nationwide…while celebrating the birth of our beloved America …on the Fourth of July.

We began with a simple discussion about our country, and the direction it has taken since Barack Obama came to power. We shared the usual complaints about the sour economy and liberal social engineering emanating from the rulers in Washington .

But then he said it. The sentence came naturally. I assume it was unplanned. But it carried the weight of a freight train. “You know when Castro took power, none of us knew he was a Communist”.

We sat stunned. He continued, “Yes, we all thought he was a patriot, a nationalist. Before the revolution he didn’t sound like a radical.”

The comparison at this point was easy, and I interjected, “You mean just like Barack Obama?”

He responded; “Yes, just like Barack Obama.”

He continued, “We were all shocked as the government just continued to grab more power. First they said the revolution is over, so please turn in your guns. We all complied.”

I remember my uncle saying after it started; “Castro will only nationalize some of the big industries. He will never come and take our family hardware store!!” But that is exactly what happened. Castro started with the sugar mills and the large industries, but they eventually came and knocked on the door of our family hardware store. My family had run this store for generations. They said we now own the hardware store, you work for us. And that nice, large four-bedroom home you own…it is now our property also, and…you can move yourself and five children into two rooms of the house, because others are moving in with you.”

The lesson learned from this discussion, is a lesson most Americans refuse to hear. Political leaders can lie about their agenda and once in office…they can take totally unexpected turns.

If you had asked us three years ago if we thought General Motors would be nationalized, we would have never believed it. We could never contemplate a country where the rule of law, the most fundamental building block of a justice society…would be evaporating, just like it did in Castro’s Cuba in the early 1960’s.

But the news of injustice keeps increasing. Black Panthers are not charged with wrong doing by the U.S. Department of Justice…because their crimes are against whites. The bondholders of GM are stripped of their assets…without due process by the government! Governmental leaders are bribed in full daylight…only to have all investigation of the crimes stifled…by the Attorney General.

The U.S. borders are over run with crime and illegal activity, and the leaders in D.C. act as if it is important to protect the lawbreakers…while the innocent are killed and over run. When local communities attempt to enforce the law, they are ridiculed…and threatened as racists and bigots. They are sued by the very administration…entrusted with enforcing the law.

Without the rule of law, the U.S. Constitution is a sham!! Without the rule of law, our beloved America is swiftly becoming a country where only the well connected and politically powerful will be safe. As Michelle Malkin has so eloquently explained in her recent book…a culture of corruption has replaced honest government.

The only way this problem will be fixed, is by massive citizen action. All honest citizens that want to be treated equally, must come together…and demand that the favoritism, the bribes, the uneven enforcement of law…end now!! And yes, it can happen here…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, News, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Fresh Air from Utah; No, not Romney you silly liberal!

January 15, 2012
Two pro-gun conservatives recently announced they were running against Utah Senator Orrin Hatch.
This is welcome news for gun owners. In a Senate career that has lasted more than thirty five years, Hatch has not been a particularly good friend of the Second Amendment.
During negotiations over the 1986 McClure-Volkmer Firearms Owners Protection Act — designed to protect gun owners from abuses of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms — Hatch sat at the negotiating table next to officials of the ATF and argued against the pro-gun positions of Sen. Jim McClure.
Though a senior member of the Senate, Hatch did nothing to block camels-nose legislation slammed through by Republican leader Bob Dole in the late 1980s to regulate armor-piercing bullets and outlaw non-existent “plastic guns.”
As ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1993-4, Hatch refused to filibuster the Brady Law, even though it would have been possible to kill it.
He supported the 1996 Lautenberg amendment to impose a lifetime gun ban on people guilty of “domestic misdemeanors” – a term so amorphous that it could apply to spanking your kid or engaging in a verbal argument.
In the wake of the Columbine shooting, Hatch voted for amendments which would have effectively banned gun shows, made it more difficult to keep a loaded gun in your home for self-defense, and codified the Bush-era semi-auto import ban.
This package of legislation was stopped in a conference committee only after Hatch and others were pummeled relentlessly by tens of thousands of GOA activists.
In 2007, Hatch supported the Veterans Disarmament Act—which could strip the Second Amendment rights of honorably discharged veterans who seek professional counseling following traumatic wartime experiences.
Over the following two years, while GOA was working with pro-gun Senators to repeal the gun ban in national parks, Hatch voted against repeal before voting for it in 2009.
Last year, Hatch opposed an amendment offered by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) to exempt gun buyer information from the Obama administration’s virtually unlimited ability to seize “business records” under the reauthorization of post-9/11 legislation.
Sen. Hatch hasn’t exactly stood up to the Obama administration, either. He voted in favor of regulatory “czar” Cass Sunstein, who favors a ban on hunting and who would grant animals legal protections in court.
And, despite repeated pleas from GOA members, he voted to confirm Eric Holder as Attorney General. In addition to being mired in the Fast and Furious scandal, Holder was the point man on gun control for President Bill Clinton and is a vocal supporter of banning many semiautomatic firearms.
Thankfully, Orrin Hatch is facing a serious challenge in this year’s Republican convention.
Former State Senator Dan Liljenquist is a stalwart pro-gun conservative who understands the dangers of compromising with the likes of President Obama.
And State Rep. Chris Herrod also jumped in the race because, he said, “we don’t have much time to fix our challenges” as a nation. Both Herrod and Liljenquist are “A” rated on gun rights issues.
The candidates will face off in the state Republican convention in April. If no candidate receives more than 60 percent of the delegate votes, the top two vote-getters will run in a June primary.
Gun Owners of America welcomes the challenge to a Senator with a long history of compromising on Second Amendment rights.
Related articles

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | 1 Comment »

Election 2012: Which candidates really believe like those that send them to foggy bottom do?

January 8, 2012

We often see in candidates the populist notion, or action that shows them to be followers of the wind. Bill Clinton being the most famous of those that rule by polls. Polls can, and are twisted by those that put the damned things together. Like statistics, they can always be manipulated to show whatever bias the pollster wishes to convey to further their position. Be that the NRA (full disclosure I am a Life Member.) or NOW.

However, answering questioneres about a subject can provide insights into a candidate. What follows is from an email from a pro gun advocacy group, NAGR, with a link following so that you may join or donate to the cause should you choose to do so.

With the Iowa caucuses just a few days behind us, and with New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada choosing their Republican candidates soon, I wanted to write to you and give you a quick update on the NAGR Presidential Survey program.

As you know, NAGR has mailed every candidate for President an official NAGR Gun Rights Survey.

Ron Paul is the only remaining Republican candidate who has returned his survey 100% in favor of gun rights.

Over the last few weeks and months, I’ve asked you to call the campaigns of Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry to demand that each candidate return their gun rights survey 100% in favor of the Second Amendment.

Believe me, your calls worked. Repesentatives from each of those campaigns called NAGR offices, demanded we instruct our members and supporters to stop calling and to send them a survey.

Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry were hurt severely in Iowa because they stonewalled gun owners by refusing to return their surveys, and I think the longer that Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney ignore gun owners, the more it will hurt them as well.

Each candidate has the NAGR Presidential Survey in hand. However, we didn’t stop the calls, and we won’t. Each of the remaining candidates needs to know that gun owners have a powerful voice and we will assume that silence is a sign that they are hiding an anti-gun position.

I have serious concerns about Romney, Santorum, Gingrich and Perry. It’s their records that worry me.

Let me take a minute or two right now to remind you about the positions of the four Presidential candidates who have so far refused to return their National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey.

Mitt Romney:

So far Mitt Romney has refused to respond to his NAGR gun rights survey, perhaps because when Mitt Romney was Governor of ultra-liberal Massachusetts he signed a bill to ban an entire class of firearms.

Would he do the same thing — or even worse — as President of the United States? His record indicates that he would.

Mitt Romney supports the Brady Registration Act, mandatory 5-day waiting periods, mandatory firearms ID cards, the Federal Feinstein Gun Ban (so-called “assault weapons ban”) and he signed the Massachusetts Semi-Auto Ban in 2004.

He even went as far as to say that he supported Massachusetts’ tough anti-gun laws: “We do have tough gun laws in Massachusetts; I support them… I won’t chip away at them; I believe they protect us and provide for our safety.”

And to throw fuel on top of Mitt Romney’s anti-gun fire, he received the endorsement of John McCain this week, who himself has recorded promotional commercials for anti-gun groups hell-bent on restricting our Second Amendment rights.

Rick Santorum:

If you’ve watched any of the Presidential debates, you’ve noticed that Rick Santorum claims time and again to be a “fighter” who has “led on conservative issues.”

Rick Santorum’s record on the Second Amendment, however, tells a different story.

In the 90s, he voted to support the Lautenberg Gun Ban, which stripped law-abiding gun owners of their Second Amendment rights for life, simply because they spanked their children or did nothing more than grab a spouses wrist.

He voted for a bill in 1999 disguised as an attempt to increase penalties on drug traffickers with guns… but it also included a provision to require federal background checks at gun shows.

In 2000, Santorum voted to force pawn shops to require a background check on anyone coming into the store to sell a firearm.

And then he voted with gun-controlling Democrats Dianne Fienstein and Frank Lautenberg to mandate locks on handguns in 2005.

But worst of all, Rick Santorum has a storied history of bailing out anti-gun Republicans facing reelection.

Rick Santorum came to anti-gun Arlen Specter’s defense in 2004 when he was down in the polls against pro-gun Republican Pat Toomey. Specter won and continued to push for gun control during his years in the Senate.

He also supported and openly campaigned for anti-gun New Jersey governor, Christine Todd Whitman.

It certainly appears that Rick Santorum has no regrets about his past anti-gun record. Worse, it appears he’d be happy to continue along this path as President.

Newt Gingrich:

For those who have followed Newt Gingrich’s career, the revelation that he talks out of both sides of his mouth won’t be a surprise.

Despite claiming to be pro-gun, Newt Gingrich’s reign as Speaker was downright hostile to our Second Amendment rights.

Newt supports the Brady National Gun Registry, a national biometric thumbprint database for gun purchasers, the Lautenberg Gun Ban and the “Criminal Safezones Act.”

Newt doesn’t think the Brady Instant Gun Registry goes far enough — he wants thumbprints:

“I think we prefer to go to instant check on an immediate basis and try to accelerate implementing instant checks so that you could literally check by thumbprint… Instant check is a much better system than the Brady process.” — June 27, 1997

Gingrich may claim to be pro-gun . . .

But his record indicates otherwise, and his refusal to answer his NAGR survey should give any Second Amendment supporter cause for concern.

Rick Perry:

Texas Governor Rick Perry has received an earful from NAGR members over the past several months for refusing to return his Candidate Survey.

His strategy seems to be to tell gun owners “trust me” while keeping completely silent on what he would do about our gun rights if elected President.

Over the years, gun owners have learned that this is a failed strategy.

George H.W. Bush ran as a pro-gun candidate for President in 1988, but when elected, things changed.

First, he signed an Executive Order banning the importation of so-called “assault weapons.”

Not only that, but it was under President Bush that “Operation Triggerlock,” which dramatically increased funding and power for the BATFE, was implemented.

Of course, as Governor of Texas, Rick Perry did make some minor improvements in state law for gun owners.

It is, however, one thing to act pro-gun as Governor of a state like Texas and quite another to be a pro-gun President of the United States.

Please keep up the pressure on these four Presidential candidates who continue to stonewall gun owners.

Give each campaign a call and demand the candidates return their National Association for Gun Rights Presidential Survey — at once:

Mitt Romney: 857-288-3500

Rick Santorum: 603-518-5199

Newt Gingrich: 678-973-2306

Rick Perry: 855-887-5627

You and I know that we have the most anti-gun President in the history of our country right now in the Oval Office . . .

. . . but perhaps even more dangerous would be a Republican with a proven anti-gun history cutting backroom, anti-gun deals.

National Association for Gun Rights

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, mysandry, News, Politics, States Rights, Wordpress Political Blogs | 5 Comments »

Merry Christmas; Some Nitwit always has to screw things up

December 26, 2011

Christmas, a day of thanks for our blessings. Irrespective of how one thinks in terms of religion, or faith. Gift giving and so on are but the shallow things involved. In Kantian Ethics we think in terms of final right, or wrong. Good, or evil, doing what is right, moral, and correct because that is what one should do. Not for reward, just because it is the correct thing to do. Even when no one else is watching.

But? Someone, or group always has to screw things up. Muslims stage an attack on innocent people in Nigeria. Some freak shoots up three generations of a family after opening presents, and I am sure that by later today there will be even more atrocities reported.

All of these things usually end up in some insane call for even further restrictions on the freedoms and liberties of the individual. Most often when those very freedoms may have prevented, or lessened the horrors released upon the victims.

More laws will be demanded by those that endure the pain of loss, as well as those with an anti freedom agenda. Any time that a law is passed it ultimately results in a loss of freedom in exchange for some perceived security. Ben Franklin summed that up for us all quite a few years ago. But? Does anyone listen these days to a dead old white man..?

Mark my words, there will be calls for extreme gun control laws in Texas as a result of the tragedy that happened just outside Dallas. But the control freaks will not say a word about what happened in Niger, where, at least legally, no one can own a weapon other than Police and Military, and, yes, you guessed it… Those with the right connections! Further, you can bet your bottom peso that the obama’s reported promise of assistance in fighting the terrorist’s will come with a price tag of some sort. Most probably involving more and liberty damaging policies, procedures, laws, or treaties…

I submit, yes, even after all these years here on WordPress, that individual freedom and liberty could have prevented or greatly lessened the degree of  both the above noted tragedies. It is called a 45 Colt or 12 gauge Shotgun in the hands of a brave, willing and trained person. Yes, my Marine and Ranger Brothers will chastise me for saying that, but? Simply put, a rifle was not needed to put a stop to the nonsense!

Political correctness be damned!

Related articles

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Economics, Editorial, Opinion, Education, Gun Control, Hoplophobia, Law, Politics, States Rights, War, Wordpress Political Blogs | Comments Off on Merry Christmas; Some Nitwit always has to screw things up

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »