Posts Tagged ‘Politics’

Watch out for GOP wooden nickels

February 6, 2010

“Watch out for wooden nickels,” is something my Grandpa used to tell me when I was a kid.  The sentiment couldn’t be more apt now though.

I’ve watched with some skepticism as Establishment Republicans have been swept into office on a tide of genuine political discontent.   As the GOP claims “great” victories in states like Massachusetts and Virginia, gun owners should be hesitant to jump on the GOP bandwagon.

On Tuesday evening, GOP pundits were championing Congressman Mark Kirk’s victory in the Illinois Republican U.S. Senate primary.  Many of those same talking heads are enthusiastically trumpeting Representative Kirk’s chances to win the Senate seat formerly occupied by President Barack Obama.

Is this Republican success reason for gun owners to be optimistic?  Hardly.

Congressman Kirk has long been an enemy of gun owners, supporting legislation to close the so-called “gun-show loop-hole”, ban certain types of semi-automatic rifles and require background checks to purchase ammunition.

Kirk is not the only anti-gun Republican looking for a promotion.  His gun-hating compadre Congressman Mike Castle of Delaware is preparing to make a run for the Senate as well.

What does this mean for gun owners?

We cannot allow ourselves to be sucked into the hallow victories being celebrated by the Republican Party.  Gun owners must be able to discern between the pro-liberty, pro-gun candidates and the anti-gun wolves hiding in Republican clothing.

That’s why your involvement with the National Association for Gun Rights is so important.  We are here to help you cut through the election year lies, through the political propaganda and expose the anti-gunners from BOTH parties.

Right now the staff at the National Association for Gun Rights is assembling data on candidates from across the country. We’re beginning to target House and Senate races, and we’re preparing our candidate surveys.

Gun rights surveys are an important part of holding politicians accountable and finding out their views on the Second Amendment.   If you’d like to read our survey, you can click here.

Please take a moment to forward this e-mail to your freedom and gun loving friends and family members, remind them that just because a politician has an “R” after their name doesn’t mean they’re pro-liberty or pro-gun.

For liberty,

Dudley's Signature
Dudley Brown
Executive Director
National Association for Gun Rights


To help the National Association for Gun Rights grow, please forward this to a friend.

To view this email as a web page, please click this link: view online.

Profiles of Valor: U.S. Army Major Brent Clemmer

February 6, 2010

On Jan. 28, 2007, while commanding the Charger Company of 2nd Battalion, 3rd Infantry Regiment, United States Army Major Brent Clemmer received notice that a helicopter had been shot down near Najaf, Iraq. Responding coalition forces were under heavy gun and mortar fire. Clemmer moved his company approximately 60 miles to connect with a Special Forces team to establish a perimeter between the downed chopper and the enemy. From there, he directed the recovery of the wreckage and the bodies of the two pilots killed in the crash. Clemmer’s unit fought off numerous enemy attacks and prepared for a full assault on the town where the insurgents were entrenched.

At dawn the following morning, however, wounded women and children began coming from the town, signaling the jihadis’ surrender and turning the would-be assault into a humanitarian mission. All told, Clemmer and his soldiers killed about 250 insurgents and captured more than 400. In addition, they recovered stockpiles of ammunition and weapons. Upon receiving the Silver Star for his actions, Clemmer said the award was a reflection on the performance of the nearly 170 soldiers in his company.

SOURCE

Epic Fail obama: FY 11 Budget

February 6, 2010

Responding to The One’s latest budget proposal, Rep. Mike Pence (R-IN) commented from the House floor, “[W]hen I look at the president’s budget for fiscal year 2011 [FY11], I think about what Albert Einstein said one time. He said that ‘doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result’ is the very definition of insanity.” Congressman Pence went on to note how Obama’s budget fits squarely within that definition, including the defense portion of that budget.

While Department of Defense (DoD) and administration staff juggle numbers at the fringes — witness the ongoing discussions over canceling the C17 Globemaster III production line and killing an alternative engine for the F-35 Lightning II — the reality is that both DoD and the administration are happy to continue the status quo.

The evidence? Despite the rhetoric-du-jour, the rubber meets the road with dollars, and notwithstanding pervasive hope ‘n’ change speechifying, virtually nothing has changed with respect to the U.S. defense budget. In this budget submission, for example, military outlays remain virtually unchanged, save a slight increase (less than two percent) over inflation.

Also, the president apparently has included supplemental budget items as an integral part of his FY11 proposal. Translation: The commercial sector’s interfacing with DoD might actually be able to depend on the budget for once rather than having to wait for end-of-year fallout money or congressional plus-ups to end the year in the black. That predictability should mean lower overall costs, rendering savings for national defense.

On the down side, however, we note that neither a new National Security Strategy (NSS) nor National Military Strategy (NMS) — the key “vision” pieces to national security — has been published since 2006. This demonstrates that despite all the hype about “change,” at least with respect to defense, not much is different — save, perhaps, a burning (dare we say, “flaming”) desire to appease the far left by eliminating DoD’s “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. Therein lies the rub: We have no real vision for tomorrow’s defense, but we face very real military budget tradeoffs today.

Budgets involve choices. What should we buy? What programs should we kill? What should we merely sustain? But these types of questions can’t be answered cogently without an overarching set of objectives. For national defense, those objectives should be articulated in both the NSS and the NMS.

The real issue for the president is determining our focus with respect to national security. Is it fighting a peer/near-peer nation? Is it conducting so-called “overseas contingency operations”? Is it some combination of both? Or is it something else? Unfortunately, the vehicle that should have answered these questions — the Quadrennial Defense Review — has become little more than a political football and/or shill for the service-of-the-hour. What is needed is an objective, disinterested look at the nation’s true national security requirements from an outsider’s perspective. Ultimately, this will lead to rational decision-making when it comes time to draft a viable national defense budget.

Fortunately, the president isn’t cutting the military to the bone, but this fact stands in contrast to the Left’s objectives, so expect considerable push-back on this portion when the budget arrives on House and Senate floors for review.

Barack Obama’s 2011 NASA budget will effectively terminate America’s manned space flight program, leaving space exploration leadership to the Chinese and the Russians. Read more here.

SOURCE
Oh, and the impostor in chief showed his true feelings about respecting the military…


At the National Prayer Breakfast Thursday, the commander in chief not only got a sailor’s name wrong, but couldn’t figure out how to pronounce “corpsman.” Yes, he said “corpse-man.”

Watch the video.


The Brady Bunch losers verses Starbucks!

February 5, 2010
Maybe Brady Campaign Should Switch To Decaf
Friday, February 05, 2010
The hand-wringers at the Brady Campaign must have figured out what the rest of us have known for quite some time.  Having been rendered all but entirely irrelevant, at least for the time being, the group is resorting to weird publicity stunts, in a vain attempt to again be taken seriously by its former not-so-secret admirers in the national anti-gun news media.

Last month, the group gave President Obama an “F” for “failed leadership” on gun control, accusing him of “squandering” the opportunity to push for tighter gun control laws.  Now it’s attacking Starbucks for allowing people to carry firearms in its stores as provided for by state law.

Get this doozie:  “It’s everyone’s right to sit in a restaurant or coffee shop with their families without intimidation or fear of guns,” the Brady Campaign says, in its modern rendition of FDR’s famous “freedom from fear” quote.

Not surprisingly, while the Brady Campaign easily fabricates a “right” to feel free from fear, it angrily scoffs at the right to self-protection by encouraging its minions to sign a petition demanding that Starbucks establish a gun policy more restrictive than state law.  “I demand that Starbucks stand up for the safety of its customers and prohibit guns in your [sic] retail establishments,” the petition reads.

A call to Starbucks has confirmed what was pretty obvious on its face.  The company is in the business to sell coffee, not jump in the middle of a Brady-generated squabble that state law has already resolved in favor of the right to carry firearms, in certain circumstances.  Starbucks also isn’t in business to help Brady get its name in the paper.

The Brady Campaign’s resorting to this kind of silliness is understandable.  It was once the most influential anti-gun group in town, able to claim some of the “credit” for the temporary imposition of the federal handgun waiting period between 1994 and 1998 and the federal “assault weapon” ban between 1994 and 2004.

But in recent years it has experienced the longest losing streak in gun control history.  The waiting period has expired in favor of the instant check system.  The 1994 gun ban has expired.  The number of Right-to-Carry states has continued to rise.  The list goes on, at the federal, state and local level.  And the group’s core arguments about the Second Amendment were rejected entirely by the Supreme Court in the Heller case.  President Obama even signed bills into law which included provisions allowing the carrying of firearms in national parks according to state law, and protecting the sale of surplus military ammunition components to the private sector.

And today, the media’s gun control darling is not the Brady Campaign’s leader, former Fort Wayne, Indiana mayor Paul Helmke, who spends his time blogging about gun control on the Huffington Post website, where members on the fringe gather to rant about mainstream America.  Today, the leader of the gun control movement is billionaire Michael Bloomberg, who spends his time (and money) as mayor of America’s most influential city.

Gun owners who like coffee ought to drop Starbucks a line and respectfully encourage the company to stay above the fray into which anti-gun activists are trying to drag them.  Click here to do so.  As for the Brady Campaign, let’s hope things continue at the present rate.  If they do, before too long we’ll have to explain who the group was, before it was forced to close its doors for lack of interest.

SOURCE

Put a Stake Through the Heart of the Anti-gun ObamaCare Bill!‏

February 4, 2010

Put a Stake Through the Heart of the Anti-gun ObamaCare Bill!

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

Thursday, February 4, 2010

What a difference a day makes!

Before the January 19th election of Republican Scott Brown as United States Senator from Massachusetts, we were being told that ObamaCare would be crammed down our throats  whether we liked it or not  and that any effort to defeat this monstrosity was hopeless.

After Brown’s election in socialistic Massachusetts sent shock waves through the liberal Democratic establishment, too many pro-gunners had assumed that we had won — and that we could just stop fighting and go home.

But a football team doesn’t leave the field and go home at half time, even if it has a healthy lead.

And Nancy Pelosi hasn’t given up her efforts to socialize America’s health care system and bring your private medical matters under strict government control.  Fox News is reporting today that congressional leaders are working on a compromise.

Pelosi herself has said that, if the “gate” to ObamaCare is locked, she will climb over the fence — or pole-vault over the wall — or parachute to a liberal socialist victory.

Pelosi’s only viable strategy is to get a reluctant House to pass the Senate’s bribe-laden, Medicare-cutting, gun-banning bill — but do so in conjunction with a “fix-it” bill which would pass the House at the same time under quickie “reconciliation” procedures.

We still have plenty of parliamentary tricks up our sleeves to try to block this.  But the easiest way to bury ObamaCare once and for all is to get just one House member to switch his vote — from supporting ObamaCare last fall to opposing it now.

The President’s spokesman, Robert Gibbs, is boasting that they are one vote away from passing it in the House.  So if we can switch one vote, we can take the “undead” ObamaCare bill and drive a stake through its heart, cut its head off at a midnight crossroads, shoot it with a silver bullet, put garlic around its neck, and bury it in a lead casket with a crucifix on the top.  And, given the damage which ObamaCare would do to America, this is hardly too much overkill.

ACTION: So, we are asking you to write your congressman again.  Tell him you want a commitment to oppose the corrupt bribe-laden Senate ObamaCare bill — and to oppose any effort to fix it up.

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

—– Pre-written letter —–

Dear Representative:

Nancy Pelosi hasn’t given up her efforts to socialize America’s health care system and bring me and private medical matters under strict government control.  She has said that, if the gate to ObamaCare is locked, she will climb over the fence — or pole-vault over the wall — or parachute to a liberal socialist victory.

Pelosi’s only viable strategy is to get the House to pass the Senate’s bribe-laden, Medicare-cutting, gun-banning bill — but do so in conjunction with a “‘”fix-it” bill which would pass the House at the same time.

The Senate would then kill the “fix-it” bill under the arcane “Byrd rule” — but gullible House members would claim that wasn’t their fault.

It is time to bury ObamaCare once and for all. This legislation will allow the ATF to troll a health/gun database in order to take away firearms from tens of millions of Americans.  Not only that, the federal bill is jam-packed with billions of dollars of bribes paid to buy the votes of unscrupulous senators and will impose a host of new taxes on me and my family.

So please make the following commitments:

* To vote against the bribe-laden, gun banning Senate ObamaCare bill under any circumstances; and,

* To publicly declare that the corrupt monstrosity is too sleazy to be cleaned up by any fix-it bill.

If you believe the American people are angry now, wait until Nancy Pelosi shoves this down our throats.

Please take this abomination off the table now — once and for all.  And, please let me hear from you that you will not vote for ObamaCare.

Sincerely,


David Olofson Still Needs Your Help

David Olofson continues to rot in jail because his AR-15 malfunctioned and the government pulled the wool over the jury’s eyes to get a conviction.  David’s wife and three children have had to struggle on without him.  GOA members have generously pitched in with monthly or one-time contributions to enable GOA to make the Olofson’s car and mortgage payments.  The economy is rough and some regular supporters have had to cut off their contributions.  If you could step up to the plate with $10 or $20 a month, or make a one-time contribution to the Olofson Relief Fund, please go to:  http://gunowners.org/olofson.htm

Obama Surrendering Internet to Foreign Powers

February 4, 2010

By golly! Didn’t Al Gore invent it?

Now for the bad news: In an effort to show the world how inclusive, sharing, cooperative, and international America can be, the Obama administration set off on a plan to surrender control and key management of the Internet by the U.S. Department of Commerce and its agents.

Full Story

Tenth Amendment Wyoming

February 3, 2010

“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”

I recently attended a meeting in Sheridan that addressed the growing movement for strengthening the Tenth Amendment in Wyoming. Indeed, this should be boilerplate for any politician at local and state level in each and every state.

The Federal government has abused the states ever since the War of Northern Aggression and, simply put, it needs to be reigned in. From abuse of the “commerce Clause” to Second Amendment issues to drug laws the Federal Government is, and has been as out of control as a drunk teenager. Anytime that anything within the Bill of Rights is weakened,the entire body of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution is weakened.

All to often though our so-called leadership does a roll over and licks the boots of the Federal lairds.

See video Here

Hat tip to Anthony Bouchard!

We need laws passed, not toothless resolutions.


Stupid is as stupid does Roundup: Man made climate change..?

February 1, 2010

Real scientist know that man cannot, and has not caused global climate change. From the global cooling chicken little scare tactics of the seventies to today’s supposed man made global warming these are, and always have been nothing but money making schemes. Is there climate change? Sure, and there always has been, it’s called seasons. Have there been global climate shifts in the past? Of course, and they are pretty well documented by real scientist’s. The various ice ages and so on. Did primitive mankind cause those? But no, the alarmist’s are still pushing to make a buck. Either through increased research funding grants, or through sales of so-called carbon credits.

Hey? All of you faux scientist’s and speculators? What kind of cheese would you like to go along with your whine? Read about it HERE!

Election Preview

January 31, 2010

“Turn out the lights, the party’s over” Has the fat lady sang her song? I myself think it’s a bit early to be saying that. Not to mention that between now and “Judgment Day 2010” an awful lot of damage can be done by the neo-communist that are running things at present. Also despite the current thrills being enjoyed by the election of Scott Brown, he is  a Massachusetts conservative, as exemplified by his voting record. That puts him somewhere to the left of RINO John McCain…

From the ‘Non Compos Mentis’ File

“You know, I was trying to think about who [Barack Obama] was tonight, and it’s interesting: He is post-racial by all appearances. You know, I forgot he was black tonight for an hour.” –MSNBC host Chris “thrill up my leg” Matthews, with a slobbering sycophantic (and genuinely racist) analysis of the SOTU

Election Preview: Democrats

Democrats have experienced a nearly unprecedented reversal of fortune lately, and the bad news just keeps on coming. Arkansas Representative Marion Berry became the sixth Democrat to announce his retirement, and his district is expected to go Republican in November. He told the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette that he urged the White House not to repeat the mistakes of 1994, when congressional Democrats were defeated resoundingly at the polls. He said Obama fired back, “Well, the big difference here and in ’94 was, you’ve got me.”

The arrogance necessary to make that kind of comment suggests that Obama has been tapping the keg of his own Kool-Aid. Given the disastrous results of his efforts on behalf of gubernatorial candidates in Virginia and New Jersey, and on behalf of Ted Kennedy’s senatorial heir apparent in deep-blue Massachusetts, he’s vastly overestimating his marquee value. His much-vaunted health care plan is all but dead, and now House and Senate Democrat leaders will be lucky to keep more members from retiring early. So maybe the “big difference” Obama was referring to is the loss of even more than 54 seats in the House.

Even Vice President Joe Biden’s son Beau has seen the writing on the wall. He announced this week that he would not run for the Senate seat vacated when his father became VP. Beau, who is Delaware’s Attorney General, indicated that he’s just too busy with a controversial child abuse case to focus on a statewide race. Yeah, right. If the Democrats in Massachusetts can’t keep the “Kennedy Senate seat” that they held for half a century, what chance does the vice president’s son have in Delaware? Republican candidate Mike Castle, a popular congressman and former governor, raised almost $2 million in campaign cash and has run virtually unopposed while Biden was still making up his mind about whether to run.

Election Preview: Republicans

The political landscape indeed favors Republicans, which also means tight races at the primary level. The contest for Florida’s Senate seat has turned into a statistical dead heat between Gov. Charlie Crist and former state House Speaker Marco Rubio. The moderate Crist’s comfortable lead has faded away in recent weeks, as he continues to take heat for Florida’s economic difficulties. The state has double-digit unemployment and was the hardest hit by the housing collapse. Crist’s popularity is dropping and Rubio, a solid conservative, is now closing the gap in the polls and in the cash department. Both candidates are comfortably ahead of Democrat Kendrick Meek.

In Arizona, erstwhile presidential candidate John McCain is facing a challenge for his Senate seat. Former Congressman J.D. Hayworth announced his candidacy, claiming he was motivated to take on McCain because the latter was an “enabler” of Obama’s fiscal policies. McCain certainly is not as conservative as he or the Leftmedia fancy. To name but a few examples, he co-sponsored the McCain-Feingold campaign finance debacle that the Supreme Court partly struck down last week; the McCain-Edwards-Kennedy Patient’s Bill of Rights imposing a new set of onerous mandates on the insurance industry; the McCain-Lieberman Climate Stewardship cap-and-trade bill; and the McCain-Kennedy Amnesty and Open Borders Act legalizing dozens of millions of illegal aliens. And that’s not to mention his opposition to the Bush tax cuts; his vicious attacks and vendettas against South Carolina Christians in the 2000 presidential primary, as well as the Swift Boat Veterans and Club for Growth; and his vote (one of six Republicans) against drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Of course, Hayworth’s voting record in Congress is nothing worth bragging about, either. He voted for the hefty farm and highway spending bills and also had a penchant for earmarks before he was ousted in 2006. Barry Goldwater, call your office.

SOURCE

Justice Alito Was Right: Well duh?

January 31, 2010

Epic fail obama really stepped into it at the SOTU. Once again attempting to pull the wool over the eyes of the American people…

Despite claims made by the president, last week’s Supreme Court opinion on campaign finance specifically excludes foreign nationals and foreign-owned corporations from its ruling.

The Supreme Court issued a ruling last week on the campaign finance that is still being discussed all over the country. In fact, it was even mentioned by President Obama at Wednesday night’s State of the Union address. The high court invalidated its own 20-year-old ruling — which had upheld a one hundred-year-old statute on group political contributions — and it also invalidated a portion of the McCain-Feingold Campaign finance law.

The 20-year-old ruling had forbidden any political spending by groups such as corporations, labor unions, and advocacy organizations (like the NRA and Planned Parenthood, for example). Ruling that all persons, individually and in groups, have the same unfettered free speech rights, the court blasted Congress for suppression of that speech. In effect, the court asked, “What part of ‘Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech’ does Congress not understand?” Thus, all groups of two or more persons are free to spend their own money on any political campaigns and to mention the names of the candidates in their materials.

Full Story