Obama Derangement Syndrome

David Horowitz warns us today against developing Obama Derangement Syndrome. I have probably been guilty of this in the past. I have tried to warn people of the historical precedents some of "The One's" moves remind me of before those moves become too big, or too entrenched to change.

So, let's be clear here. Do I think Obama is "The One," or the Lightworker, or the Messiah, or any of these terms which have been applied to him? No, emphatically not! My Messiah died on a cross 2000 years ago. Next week I will be celebrating his last days on earth starting with Palm Sunday, moving to Maunday Thursday, Good Friday, and Easter. On that day he rose from the dead. No matter what happens to me on this earth, I will live with him in eternity. No, I call him "The One" to mock people, like Peggy the Moocher (thank you Michelle Malkin) who evidently do think he is the savior. I would like to know if Peggy's life has been improved since her savior was elected, but I am sure Mrs. Malkin has moved on to other things.

While I believe that I will be saved (though the Lord knows I do not even come close to deserving it) I do not believe this nation can survive by constantly bending, twisting, and defying what we know to be His wishes. Mr. Obama seems to be wrecking anything and everything about the country that he can. He seems to be tearing up the Constitution and the Bill of Rights with each appointment he makes, with each piece of legislation he endorses or signs, with each overture he makes to our enemies, with each snub he delivers to our allies. If some people think that he may be the "Manchurian Candidate," well, who can blame them. Surely to do this much damage to this country in such short order would require careful planning for years and years. Frankly, he reminds me of the 60s radicals who wanted to blow everything up because, in their opinion, the world was unjust...as if they were the first generation to discover that fact, and by throwing out the baby and the bath water they would be able to make everything new and good.

Is "The One" evil, the Anti-Christ? My take is that no, he is not evil. Evil requires that a person know that he is doing evil, and he does it anyway. I think Obama believes he is doing good, or at least not doing bad things. This makes him misguided. I can not say the same thing about all the people surrounding Obama, or those who have influenced him. But I could wish that he would listen to someone outside his party, that he would be guided by the rule of law (the real rule of law, not that phony made up stuff Clinton was always yammering on about). If he thinks the Constitution is deficient, there is a way to change it without "reinterpreting" its words into saying what they clearly do not. All of these things though, would slow down, greatly, what Obama evidently wishes to do. Note to Obama: that's a feature, not a bug.

Finally, do I think Obama is leading us down a path toward fascism? Yes I do. If indeed Congress is moving to stop him, they better get moving. But I do not think they will offer much resistance. Nancy Pelosoi has been elected to be the Speaker of the House of Representatives. Therefore, the sense of the House is that this Leftist from the City of San Francisco, one of the most, if not the most Left leaning areas of the country, represents the views of the majority of Americans. Heaven help us! If my read of the situation is anywhere near correct, then the United States of America has been lost. I do not see anyone on the horizon who has the temperament, the will, or the background to lead us out of this mess. In any case, any politician who tells Peggy the Moocher the truth will be slapped down, while those who lie to her are hailed as "The One." And so our once great republic dies.

Will the last American please turn out the lights, take down the flag, and close the door?

Why do you need a gun in a Hospital

On Sunday morning, gunman Robert Stewart barged into Pinelake Health and Rehab in Carthage, North Carolina, and killed seven patients and a nurse, wounding three others. As in previous massacres, the killer picked a so-called “gun free” zone where firearms for self-protection are officially prohibited ...

We in North Carolina need to get most of these "gun free zones" also called "criminal free fire zones" repealed. Right now there is a bill before the legislature eliminating the Restaurant ban. This would be a good start. Florida has no restaurant ban, and has had no problem as a result. Kentucky has a very good compromise, where concealed carriers can enter and eat in the restaurant, but not in the bar. Virginia has passed a repeal of the restaurant ban twice. But Governor Tim Kaine has vetoed. Twice. They are now seeking to over ride the veto. Good luck to them.

But, the fact is that anywhere the law abiding are disarmed by law is someplace that a criminal will view as a target rich environment. If the legislators truly cared about the people for whom the work, they would act immediately to get rid of these free fire zones now.


read more digg story

Scare tactics: the mainstream media's war on guns

The mainstream media's bias against guns is clearly evident in the way headlines
and story content lie, exaggerate, sensationalize, and try to mislead the public
into following their agenda.

In the "Blowback" section, where Daniel White answers selected comments, he had a comment by Portland Progressive Examiner that said:

What is wrong with an assault weapon's ban? Why does anyone need an assault weapon? Is the gun lobby capable of any compromise?

Now, I don't often comment on these articles, but I couldn't help myself. My comments follow:

Reading the Blowback from Portland Progressive Examiner, you answered very well. You were very restrained. I would have had to post something like the following:

"The story of gun control in this country is one of they propose, and we "compromise." And we compromise, and compromise, and compromise. Each time we are promised that if we give up just a little of our rights (guaranteed by the Bill of Rights no less), that we will be much safer. We "compromise", but they never deliver on the "safer" part. Instead they always come back with yet more gun control. 20,000 gun laws later, and now they want us to give up semi-auto rifles, calling them "assault weapons." But you see, calls for so called "assault weapon" bans can be best characterized not as compromise but as ceding of our rights. So, here's the deal, you give up some of your rights, guaranteed under the Bill of Rights, and we'll keep ours. When you get up to 20,000 laws ceding your rights, and still you aren't safer, then lets talk. What do you say?"

Now, I do not really want him, or anyone else to cede any of their rights. Liberty was too costly to just throw it away, and doing so stomps on the graves of those who fought so hard for it. It is a precious gift. But how else do we make it clear that this is not an issue of "compromise." What you are asking is for some of us to give up our rights so you can feel more comfortable. I, for one, am through doing so.
read more digg story

Gun control and addiction (Part 1)

There are many behavioral similarities between alcoholism and gun control.

At first, when reading this, I thought Howard Nemerov was kidding, running a spoof. But, it's not, and he's not. Go read it and decide for yourselves (all two of you:-) Personally, I think it stands up, and serves as a way to analyse these poor creatures.

Part 2 follows Part 1, so just follow the link to finish reading about Gun Control and Addiction.

read more digg story

Where Have You Gone Mr. Jefferson

Go watch this video by Mike Church at the Campaign for Liberty.

Congress Abdicating Its Power (and Our Sovereignty)

George Will is the "conservative" that even liberals like, or at least, will tolerate. In other words, he is no conservative at all. Nevertheless, like a broken clock that tells the correct time twice per day, every now and then George Will hits one out of the park. Today, on Townhall.com, he has an article that precisely points out the problem with our current government. The problem is that Congress has routinely delegated to the executive branch the legislative power to write laws. Every time a regulatory agency puts a new, or proposed regulation in the Federal Register, which has the effect of law, that agency is usurping the powers vested in the legislative branch. The fact that Congress authorized them to do this is beside the point. Congress does not have the power, under the Constitution, to abdicate its power, or our sovereignty.

Go read, and tell me what you think.

Mexico's drug war not fault of U.S. gun owners

Instead of ratcheting down on the firearms rights of American citizens, how
about putting troops along the border to intercept drug smugglers coming north,
and the gun shipments allegedly heading south?

Dave Workman does an admirable job here, but I find one piece of weasel wording on the part of William Hoover in testimony before Congress:

It is true that William Hoover, assistant director for Field Operations with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives testified recently before Congress that “90 percent of the weapons (recovered at Mexican crime scenes) that could be traced were determined to have originated from various sources within the U.S.”

Got that. Of the guns that "could be traced" 90% originated in the US. What about those that could not be traced? What percentage of all guns were ones that "could be traced?" He seems to be trying to characterize the story to sell an agenda. He wants us to believe that while the Mexican Drug Cartels are waging a war against the government of Mexico using RPGs, fully automatic AK-47s, and other military arms coming in via the international black market, it is our semi-auto guns that need to be banned.

Bah!

read more digg story

Why Do You Need A Gun in the Home

Anti-rights proponents like to tell us how dangerous it is to keep a gun in the
house, because the most likely scenario is that the criminal, who somehow
possesses superior martial arts and gun handling skills, will disarm you and
turn the gun on you. Here is a dose of reality.

I run these whenever I can find them to illustrate that crimes happen everywhere, and when you least expect them. Fortunately, most of us will probably never have to defend our lives, or those of our loved ones, with a gun. But, that probability is not zero. You wear seat belts, and purchase car insurance. You have smoke detectors and fire extinguishers. If you think the price of a gun is too great to pay for the small risk you might need it, fine. But don't make that choice for the rest of us.
read more digg story

Revealing the Second Amendment.

The move is on to repeal the Second Amendment. This is an admission that the
right is absolute and impervious to ordinary due process short of another
amendment. Well, here it is. The response is to Reveal the Second Amendment and
how it protects all other rights in 2009 and every generation.

A powerful piece by John Longenecker. I have called the Second Amendment the "canary in the coal mine," but Longenecker explains it more powerfully than I can. Go read.
read more digg story

British MEP Hannan Warns Against Nationalized Health (VIDEO)

Well, tonight was Hannity’s turn to get an interview with Daniel Hannan, and
apparently the young PEM is truly flummoxed by his appeal since his
parliamentary dress-down of PM Gordon Brown. What he doesn’t realize is that his warnings against socialism, a huge government and nationalized health care are
resonating with a large portion of America...

Following up on my post here is this, which shows more of the British experience with socialized medicine. Hannity talks about a recent story in the British press where women with breast cancer were to be denied drugs and therapy to deal with it because these things were just too expensive. (sardonic)These women just have to accept it and die, for the good of society no less. So that maybe more money would be available for an after school basketball program for instance. I'm sure most women will see the importance of these programs and go to their graves singing "How Glorious Our Revolution, Comrade."(/sardonic)

The decision in Britain is truly monstrous. But one can see the whole slippery slope from a "right" to abortion, to abortion on demand, to a duty to die. We in America, do not want to go there. Stop nationalized social medicine before it's too late.
read more digg story

Ordinary People Who Just Snap

Clayton Cramer has a great post over at his blog entitled Ordinary People Who Just Snap, which shows that ordinary people don't just snap for the most part. After giving some statistics about the typical homicide perpetrator, Clayton concludes:

There are people without criminal or mental illness histories who do, indeed, lose their tempers, go get a gun, and murder someone. But they aren't that common. Far more typical is the person who, by the time they reach adulthood, already knows what it is liked to handcuffed by a police officer, has been convicted of at least a misdemeanor--and carries a bail bond company's business card with him.

The War on Guns: What is Purpose of ATF's 'Forward Trace Initiative'?

The War on Guns: What is Purpose of ATF's 'Forward Trace Initiative'?

In light of the abuses of the ATF, many of which have been documented on the pages of War on Guns, we want to know what they mean by the "Forward Trace Initiative."

Digg wouldn't let me link directly from the Examiner site, so have linked to it indirectly here.

Obama to Speak at Notre Dame University

Laura Hollis is upset that The One has been asked by her alma mater Notre Dame to deliver the commencement address and receive an honorary degree in this article on Townhall.com. In it, she cites many of the reasons Catholics should be outraged. You need to read the whole article to get the full effect of just how outraged Mrs Hollis is. From issues of life, to taxation, to foreign policy, Obama does nothing but spit in the face of Catholics everywhere (and Lutherans, and Methodists, and Baptists, and, well, pretty much all Bible believing Christians.) Here is a sample:

That a Catholic (and some say, the premier Catholic) university would overlook Obama’s appalling record on human life, disregard the inconsistencies in his positions, and bestow an honor of this magnitude upon him is more than disturbing. It is a travesty. It is a lie. And it is the culmination of the lies that Catholics commit and endorse when they hide behind the leftist rubric of “social justice,” which is nothing more than a pious euphemism for wealth confiscation and redistribution. There is nothing religious about it (indeed, some religious writers point to the 10th Commandment as proof). But anti-life, and anti-American activists and politicians like Obama have been using “social justice” for decades to deceive decent, unsuspecting, well-meaning Catholics (and others) into supporting policies and organizations that undermine everything they stand for...

For those not familiar, the 10th Commandment states "You will not covet..." The writer she is refering to can be read here.

Why Even Pretend We're Following the Constitution

Tam has a great piece up over at the View From The Porch. The One has been acting like we are already a Communist Paradise, and he is just making up whatever he thinks might work, or at least what might make us look the other way. Tam asks "Why do they even pretend anymore?"

Note: they don't

The Liberty Sphere: LIBERTY ALERT! National Service Becomes Law

The Liberty Sphere: LIBERTY ALERT! National Service Becomes Law

This new "Mandatory National Service" sounds like the Hitler Youth to me. We all know how that turned out. They aren't getting their commie collectivist clutches on my grand daughter if I have anything to say about it.

Blame criminal, not guns for Oakland shootings

I've been given permission to share with you a communication sent to me by Joe Horn, Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, Retired. Joe and I worked together some years back on a physician's form I'll tell you about some time, but for now, let's focus on his response to the Oakland aftermath...

One of David Codrea's sayings, which I have shamelessly expropriated for my own use is that "if a man can not be trusted with a gun, he shouldn't be walking around on the streets."

We all have failed dreams. Life is full of failed dreams, pain, and loss. But as anyone who ever thought about it can tell you, focusing on these incidents leads to grim thoughts and perhaps tragic decisions. On the other hand, life is also full of joy and fullfillment. It just depends on where you want to focus your attention. But go read the story. Unlike me, David is a great journalist and writer.

read more digg story

Illinois Assembly considering racist bill aimed at blacks

The history of gun control is the history of racism. It is even more poingant when it is a Black legislator promoting anti-Black racist legislation.

This one is especially sick. The residents of this area are not being well represented.

read more digg story

MIAC Report BLOWBACK!

A controversial report from the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) is
getting a lot of attention at the State Capitol and has prompted Lieutenant
Governor Peter Kinder (R-MO) to ask that Missouri Public Safety Director John
Britt be placed on administrative leave. MIAC works with the Department of
Homeland Security.

I'm glad to see that the Lieutenant Governor is asking some hard question about this report. I personally don't feel like a terrorist, and I hope my government doesn't consider me one. But who knows these days?

read more digg story

Socialized Medicine

Last night, I was coming home late, and listening to the Mark Levin Show. Mr. Levin had some snippets from the National Center for Policy Analysis (NCPA) paper entitled 10 Surprising Facts about American Health Care. For instance, did you know that:

Americans have better survival rates than Europeans for common cancers, or that Americans have lower cancer mortality rates than Canadians. How about that lower income Americans are in better health than comparable Canadians. You surely knew, didn't you, that Americans are responsible for the vast majority of all health care innovations. At least you knew that. No? Well then, go read the link above, then spread the word to your friends and family.

I know, I know, the Commiecats are moving on all fronts at an alarming pace, and it's hard to keep up with all the brush fires they are setting at every turn. And the MSM hasn't helped. First it was the British model. Then stories came out that Britain might not be so great after all. Bodies piled up in the basement of one hospital kind of caused people to wonder. But Canada! There was the shining example. But then...oops...Canada turned out to be...well...not so great. Remember the MP who had a serious illness, but decided not to come across the border because it just wouldn't be fair, though it might have saved his life? Sean Penn thinks Cuba is wonderful, and the fact that few facts come out of Cuba makes its health care practices all the more appealing. I don't know about you, but Cuba hasn't done anything right so far, so I am not willing to bet the farm on Cuba. Lately it's been either the Swedes or the Norwegians, I can't keep track.

Here's the thing. Socialism never has worked. It is a failed business model, and having just the right person at the top leading the charge will not help the fact that it is a failed business model. Medicine has costs. Those costs could be lowered with serious tort reform that gets rid of the jackpot scheme we now have, gets rid of most class action lawsuits, and makes the loser pay the costs of the winner for his defense. We can also tinker with the health care system at the margins, but in the end, we have the finest health care system in the world, bar none. Don't mess with success.

Why do you need a gun in a Burger King

Why do you need a gun at a Burger King? Well, here's one reason.

The robber entered wearing a ski mask. He approached a clerk, showed his
gun and demanded money, said Miami police spokesman Jeff Giordano.

A customer eyed him and the two started arguing. The customer had
a concealed-weapons permit and his gun -- and the two exchanged gunfire.

The Liberty Sphere: LIBERTY ALERT! Secrets of BO's Civilian Force

The Liberty Sphere: LIBERTY ALERT! Secrets of BO's Civilian Force

In a comment by the Welshman he said:

Obama workers in Birmingham, Alabama state up front that this is their ultimate goal. They said, 'We are not looking for a fight...that is, not until we have an army.'

Militia Movement, You Say..?

Demonizing honest citizens with historical heritage and citizen authority is
suspicious. It divides Americans and hides historical truths. Why?

As a child of public education, it took a long time to shake off the notion that Militia=Bad. But it is the law. At the time of the founding, there was much discussion of, and suspicion of, something called "special militia." In that context, the National Guard would qualify. But the unorganized militia does exist, and can be effective. When Katrina struck, and folks found themselves without police protection, some neighborhoods organized themselves into armed groups to protect their homes and families. That was the unorganized militia. When ordinary citizens, under the banner of the Minuteman Project, went to the borders to stop the illegal crossings that the government refused to stop, they to were the unorganized militia, not vigilantes. Militias have operated throughout our history, and have operated to protect citizens from abusive government, or lack of government in some cases. I also have to ask why the government wants to divide Americans and hide historical truth?
read more digg story

Gun carry law shut down over environmental impact

A federal judge ruled there must be a full review of the possible environmental
impact of allowing citizens on national properties to carry concealed guns in
holsters rather than locked cases.

The references to two Gun Rights Examiners' articles in this piece from WorldNetDaily show that the Examiners are indeed succeeding in reaching a wider audience. Good news indeed.
read more digg story

Top 40 Reasons to Support Gun Control

These are funny, because they are so true. Go read, and be amused.

read more digg story

I'll be lying in a pile of brass

The problem with the strategy of only carrying a gun when you might need it is
that you don't know when that will be.

I also carry where ever it is legal to do so, precisely because you never know where or when a criminal will strike. I need to do more "Why do you need a gun in..." stories to illustrate the point, but I have read about shootings in schools, police stations, banks, parks, churches, synagogues, retail outlets, restaurants, homes, and...well...everywhere. I have read about citizens defending themselves and their families in Wal Mart parking lots, from home invasions, at mega-Churches, while driving, and....well...pretty much everywhere.

This brings up the idea that CHL are legally prevented from carrying at a whole laundry list of places, most of them because of some big lobby group like the Restaurant Association, or the State Police, who believe they are preventing possible lawsuits by people if somehow they can get such provisions written into law. I think this is misguided. After all, it is not the CHL holders they need to fear, but the criminals and gang bangers who do not obey the law, and carry in these places anyway.

In any case, I am not being paranoid; just prepared. I look at a gun pretty much the same as insurance. I don't want to use it, but if I need it I'll be glad I bought it (and carried it, and practiced with it.) I also have smoke detectors, with batteries changed every year, but I don't expect a fire.
read more digg story

Meet the 'Rapist Protection Act'

Few gun control proposals more clearly reveal the ultimate intention to disarm
American citizens than those which punish lawful gun owners for the crimes of
others. Imagine a mandatory gun storage law which would make you criminally
liable for guns stolen from you, even if you stored them under lock and key ...

I have written to all the State Senators involved in vetting this bill in committee at the moment. Of those, only Senator Phil Berger has replied that he does not favor this law. No one else.
If you live in North Carolina, please write these Senators and express how you feel about it.

read more digg story

Militia members are not terrorists

One of the (many) things that bothered me about the Missouri Information Analysis Center (MIAC) report, ostensibly written to help Missouri police officers identify potential terrorists, is that even among people outraged by the report, there seemed to be a tendency to treat "militia" as a dirty word.It is, of course, nothing of the sort.

read more digg story

Why Conservatives Bristle

This is the age in which traditional conservatives, not the big-government variety, bristle. Regardless of whether the current economic policies 'succeed' or 'fail,' we still bristle because of the abandonment of the very principles that made this country great.

Go read. It's a fine article, and as always, the Welshman is clear and to the point.

Read it? Good.

I would add a little bit to the principles, though I understand that examiner articles are necessarily brief. I would add that small, limited government means that government only acts in a small number of defined spheres, for which it holds exclusive authority to act. A huge amount of the legislation and rule making that has come down the pike in the last 100 years has been outside the scope of the Constitution. Either not enough people were paying attention, or they thought they were getting more of other peoples' money than they were paying out. Either way, it is a massive corruption of the system which causes any true conservative to bristle. A large number of our laws are no longer understandable by the average person, and yet the average Joe can easily stumble over them and become entrapped. This wasn't supposed to happen in America.

I have also come to believe, reluctantly, that we must have term limits for Congressmen and Senators. I know some of the arguments against this. In general, imposing term limits is seen as a limit on the voters free speech rights expressed in the First Amendment. And it is. But on the other hand, our lawmakers no longer look at law as something they too have to abide by. It has become a rarefied, Olympian undertaking, where politicians become rich handing out favors and making speeches. It was intended to be a burden which business people and farmers would take up, reluctantly, and turn over at to someone else at the first opportunity.

I also have come to believe that we must return to the older way of electing Senators. The House was to be directly elected by the people. The Senate was to be elected by the various State Legislatures. In this way both the People and the States would have a say in legislation. It would reinforce the notion, almost lost today, of the States being Sovereign in the own right.

Finally, we must force Congress to write the laws, and not delegate the making of law to Federal Agencies through grants of authority to make rules and regulations which have the effect of law. The pages and pages of the Federal Register, where new rules are announced, continues to grow at an accelerated pace. It is no use to claim ignorance of the law, but can you honestly truly know the law when it is changing constantly at a dizzying pace? What was legal yesterday, has become illegal today.

These are a few of the things I would have added to a fine article.

read more digg story

Government Reverting to Form

Over at the Smallist Minority Kevin as a post up decrying asset forfeiture laws as theft under color of authority. It is not hard to see that as practiced by many government agencies, it does amount to theft, especially by the police department of Tenaha, Texas. Go read his post, then read the comments, which are equally good, if you have the stomach for it.

The Breda Fallacy: bacon built right in#links

The Breda Fallacy: bacon built right in#links

In case you are wondering what to do with your frustration and anger over The One's policies and lawlessness, Breda has one idea. Or you could double down, and read Mark Levin's Liberty and Tyranny. I will be doing a book report as soon as I can find a copy.

The War on Guns: National Parks Gun Ruling is Judicial Activism, Not Justice

The War on Guns: National Parks Gun Ruling is Judicial Activism, Not Justice

David Codrea hits the nail on the head again in his Examiner article, linked to here from his website War on Guns. Maybe if the bureaucrats' ox was being gored here, they wouldn't be so quick to join in disarming you and me.

I had to go this route to referencing this article because of continuing problems with Digg not recognizing that I had logged in.

Saving Freedom for Future Generations

Paul Jacob has an article up today, entitled From Oz To Obama, which touched the way I feel about what is currently happening in America. It seemed a fitting item to make up today's post. Go read.

The War on Guns: Illegal Doesn't Mean Unavailable

The War on Guns: Illegal Doesn't Mean Unavailable

Go read the post, then read the link to the original source. Unfortunately, in a country like Mexico where corruption has become institutionalized, everyone ignores the laws, and everyone else winks. Unless you happen to be someone on the outs with the establishment. But the more important item is that once again, the MSM has lied...out and out lied...to present an agenda which is...dare I say it...evil. They knew, or should have known this.

H/T to David Codrea for finding this.

Getting Through to a Liberal

I had a recent conversation with a friend who said that "I generally agree with most of what (Glenn) Beck says, but he offers no solutions. He just complains." Dumbfounded, I eventually recovered my wits enough to point out the the things Beck points out daily are followed by references to his 9 principles, and 12 values, and that if Congress and the President would follow the Constitution, we wouldn't be in this mess. My friend would have none of it, though. Unless Beck was going to personally lead us out of the current situation, he should just shut up.

Hmmmm.

Not everyone who understands what is happening to the US has the necessary personality or skills to be politician. Does that mean that those of us not so blessed (or cursed) should shut up? Really? What about freedom of the press and expression? How about sending our representatives a list of grievances? How else are we supposed to get their attention? But beyond all that, the consistent message of Glenn Beck, and for that matter of Rush Limbaugh, is that we need to lead ourselves; to be responsible for ourselves. We don't need a "Leader" to do this for us, but we may need a skilled politician to execute the Constitutionally made laws for us. Parties do not matter, and frankly I have begun to see both parties as the same, one being a little more, the other being a little less. What we need, and are not finding anywhere, are people willing to follow the Constitution. That is the consistent message of Glenn Beck.

But sometimes you just can't get through to a liberal.

The Liberty Sphere: Second Amendment News Roundup for 3/19/09

The Liberty Sphere: Second Amendment News Roundup for 3/19/09

This, or something like used to be a round-robin affair of various gun bloggers. It seems to have fallen to the Welshman in his blog, The Liberty Sphere. As usual, he does a good job, and saves me having to figure out which one to post in my limited time. Thanks, Welshman.

Judge blocks national parks gun rule

"If they scream, who is likely to hear them first?"

David Codrea asks the question I have always wanted to know: if the people who made the law were subjected to the consequences of the laws they made, would they have made it?

read more digg story

No net loss for gun rights

The concept of "no net loss" should be implemented to keep from losing more of our Second Amendment rights.

An interesting concept for use as a political ploy, perhaps. However, the history of gun control has been compromise, after compromise, after compromise. We give up some of our rights, in return for promises of greater safety which never materialize. Then something else happens, and there are calls for yet more compromise. The citizen always loses in these compromises, and the gun grabbers and statists always gains.

Still, the idea has merit as a way to force repeal of some of the worst of the gun control laws.

read more digg story

VCDL Alert

I received this from Virginia Citizens Defense League's Philip Van Cleve today:

http://www.vcdl.org/help/abbr.html

According to a breaking story on the Washington Post, a judge has placed a temporary block on carry in National Parks because the DOI's process in doing the new rule was "outstandingly flawed."

Oh, baloney.

Anyway, we have not seen the actual ruling.I expect this to be appealed and hopefully to get overturned. This might also provide the impetus to pass a bill to allow carry and bypass the DOI completely.However, this just goes to show you that if you get the right judge you can get a ruling that says the moon is made of green cheese.In the meantime you might want to stop carrying in National Parks until we get more information on this issue.We'll keep you updated.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/19/AR2009031902801.html?hpid=moreheadlines

http://tinyurl.com/decxmt

Judge Blocks Bush Rule Allowing Concealed Weapons in National Parks

By Del Quentin Wilber
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, March 19, 2009; 5:35 PM

A federal judge today blocked a last-minute rule enacted by PresidentBush allowing visitors to national parks to carry concealed weapons.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly issued a preliminary injunction in a lawsuit brought by gun-control advocates andenvironmental groups. The Justice Department had sought to block the injunction against the controversial rule.

The three groups that brought the suit -- the Brady Campaign toPrevent Gun Violence, the National Parks Conservation Association and the Coalition of National Park Service Retires -- argued the Bush Administration violated several laws in issuing the rule.

In her ruling, Kollar-Kotelly agreed that the government's process hadbeen "astoundingly flawed."

The regulation took effect Jan. 9 and allowed visitors to carry loadedconcealed guns into national parks and wildlife refuges. In the past,they had been allowed in such areas only if they were unloaded, store dor dismantled.

Cap and Trade's Regressive Tax

Yesterday, I wrote about the $2 Trillion cap and trade proposal by the Obama administration. One of the things I mentioned was that cap and trade represented a regressive tax. Today's article by Jillian Bandes, by the same title as the post, reports on a Tax Foundation report that tells us just how regressive such a tax would be.

Greenpeace claims benefits which would offset the tax, but their first claim, that global warming would be stopped, is fictional. Their claim of "green jobs" also requires subsidies from still other taxes in order to work. The whole thing reminds me of children happily making mud pies. They show the mud pies to Mom, who declares them gorgeous, but in reality no one is going to eat them.

Bleak Winter Leads to Bleak Spring

Also from Townhall.com is this article by Emmett Tyrrell, entitled "The Bleak Winter's Behind Us, but What's Ahead." Tyrrell brings to our attention that The One's cap and trade proposal would cost yet another $2 Trillion dollars (aren't you growing tired of the huge expense of all these programs?) This is despite the utter failure to prove a man made component to the global warming scam, or the fact that cap and trade has spectacularly failed to bring about a lowering of CO2 emissions in Europe. What it would do is transfer huge amounts of wealth from the private sector to the public. It would give those 535 incompetents in Congress yet more say in our energy industries. It would jack up the cost of nearly everything you purchase, without adding value. I call that a tax, and a highly regressive one at that.

Cap and trade is a bad idea, to solve a non-existent problem which is based on unproven theories. It should be stopped in its tracks.

Nationalization as a Route to Socialist Policy

Michael Reagan has a great article, entitled A World Gone Mad over at Townhall.com. In it he makes the point that Barney Frank, Christopher Dodd, and a few others should be wearing prison stripes right now. I privately made the same point to my wife right after the first TARP was passed (yes, by both Republicans and Democrats.) But what has unfolded since is far worse, and has made the situation worse. Reagan's plight, by the way, is exactly what I warned about at the time. Namely, that lending and credit would become the political tools of the left. So, for example, someday I expect to see that...say...Kimber would not be able to receive credit since it is a "merchant of death" or some such. We are seeing up close now the effects of having government mucking about in private affairs.

Are you mad enough yet?

Scientific Resources That Refute Global Warming

Contrary to the assertion by Al Gore that the 'science is settled,' there are a
wealth of voices within the scientific community that not only question the
global warming hypothesis but outright reject it. And they provide the hard
science to prove that the theory is wrong..

I used to be heavily involved in the "global warming" scam. It never made sense to me that so little CO2 could cause so much calamity. I always asked, and never got an answer what caused the previous warmings, when man supposedly was not around? And I always suspected that at the center of the mess was a leftist trying to cripple our economy. Now I know. Thanks, Weshman.
read more digg story

Obama Bans Ammunition, not so called "Assault Weapons"

In an article yesterday, David Codrea warned about a new policy being implemented by the DoD to scrap once fired brass, rather than sell it for re-use to companies like Georgia Arms, who reload the ammunition for training. "Range Ammo" we call it, and range ammo is used in quite high amounts by law enforcement and by civilians seeking to improve their effectiveness with weapons, as well as for target practice.

Of course this is wrong on so many levels. First, by scrapping brass instead of selling it for re manufacture, the value of the brass is cut in half. Not a good use of taxpayer funds by an agency that has a fiduciary responsibility to spend our funds wisely. Second, at a time when jobs are short, it would seem that every job that the DoD can save in the U.S. would be one less person on the public dole. Georgia Arms will have to lay off half its workforce if this policy stands. Third, at a time when ammunition supplies are already tight, and local budgets are stretched, law enforcement agencies hardly need to pay more for the ammunition used than they have to.

Perhaps this is just some zany idea, hatched in the bowels of the Pentagon, by someone who didn't know what he or she was doing. You would be surprised how often such things happen. But given the "The One's" penchant for illegally disarming his "subjects" it sure feels like a backdoor approach to banning so called "assault weapons." After all, guns without ammunition are just clubs. Please write you Congressmen and Senators, and ask them to take action to end this policy now.

Update: Well, that was fast. I am embarrassed to be behind on this curve. Kurt Hoffman reports that the policy is rescinded. A win for the gun owning community. I would like to point out that I do not personally own a rifle that fires either .223 or .308 , yet I sent my Senator a letter yesterday, requesting he take action. Whether you are a hunter, a target shooter, an instructor, a collector or any other type of gun owner, we should all stand shoulder to shoulder when any segment of our community is attacked. An attack on one of us should be seen as an attack on all.

Calls to Ban "Assault Weapons" Again

Jacob Sullum, who also writes for Reason Magazine, has an article up on Townhall.com entitled The Gunman and the Gun Ban. Sullum, to his credit, writes occasional articles favorable to the Second Amendment in Reason and for other publications. In this article, he makes the point that banning so called "assault weapons" is not a particularly fruitful approach, if reducing crime is the goal.

Of course, this was predicted. Like mushrooms coming out after a rain, the calls of the Brady Campaign and the Violence Policy Center for a ban on so called "assault weapons" after a rampage shooting is utterly predictable. But if banning such weapons would not prevent crime, would in fact make criminals of a huge number of hard working, taxpaying American men and women. So, what then is the true goal?

If I may be allowed to speculate, it is the ultimate disarmament of the American civilian population. The folks in power do not want citizens, who think the government works for them. No, they want subjects, who work for the government.

Why Do You Need A Gun At Home

A woman and her three daughters were brutally murdered this week in yet another instance of police inability to respond to a 9-1-1 call in time to save victims. In the Conover, North Carolina home invasion, authorities say Lisa Saephan and her three children – 20-year-old Melanie, 18-year-old Pauline and 3-year-old Cody – were stabbed or shot ...

I run this type of posting whenever I can to show that a person is literally not safe anywhere. In church, at school, in a restaurant, in a bank, or at the State Fair. Whatever our servant lawmakers have in mind when the write these sorts of laws, laws that disarm the public in these places are not there to protect you and me. I suspect they are writing in stumbling blocks, hoping to discourage our taking advantage of our rights, and making the lives of the police easier. Doesn't sound like the correct motives to me, does it to you?

read more digg story

Sovereignty in 2009.

Most of the American Left gives us a puzzle: why would the left give up their
rights along with those of the right? Why would anyone surrender up their
sovereignty? Could it be that many Americans don't know what Sovereignty is?

Longenecker's style may seem a little turgid in this post, but he is absolutely right about the threats to our freedom and liberty. Our servants do not often like it when we point out to them that they are, indeed our servants, and not the other way around. Because the Bill of Rights still stands, even if we elected our servants on a platform of making these rights illegal, they may not do so. Of course, they CAN do so, but when they do they are in effect, criminals. Shouldn't we begin locking them up?

read more digg story

The Liberty Sphere: NewsBusters Blasts Commercial Appeal Gun Hysteria

Go read The Liberty Sphere: NewsBusters Blasts Commercial Appeal Gun Hysteria. The post in turn links to a NewsBusters article that savagely says it all. Criminals are criminals because they do not obey laws. Therefore, making a law to prevent someone from carrying loaded firearms in his vehicle won't keep someone intent on murder from carrying a loaded firearm in his vehicle. Elementary my dear Watson!

Why people carry guns

Most people who choose to carry a firearm for self defense will, sooner or later, have someone ask them the question, "why do you carry a gun?". Here's a look into why.

Go read. I have found that most of the people I have talked to feel much as author does. They aren't out looking for someone to shoot, and most pray they will never have to use their weapon off a range. I know I feel that way. But, I also feel it is a civic duty to carry a gun wherever I can. The gun is a great equalizer. With it, the women, old, the weak, and the unfit can stand up to those who would take away their dignity. Without it, society devolves to who can be the most barbaric to whom.

read more digg story

Germany's gun controls drove most firearms underground

As has already been noted elsewhere, Germany's already tight gun control laws
did nothing to prevent a bloody murder spree almost simultaneous with a similar
crime in Alabama. What hasn't been much discussed, though, is the extent to
which Germany's laws have also driven the majority of firearms in that country
beyond the reach of the law.

This is disturbing to an American. I Europe, people routinely disobey laws, and unless they happen to be caught, and when and if law enforcement wants to prosecute. This breeds a general and widespread disrespect for laws at all levels of society. Is that what we Americans want? We have traditionally respected even laws with which we disagreed. More and more, though, we find ourselves in the same boat as the Europeans, weighing the costs of non compliance with the sillier aspects of our own laws. This is a dangerous precedent, which will eventually render government either ineffective, or tyrannical, or both.
read more digg story

The Liberty Sphere: Censorship

Also from the Welshman is The Liberty Sphere: Censorship. I had a post from David Codrea over at the War on Guns a couple of weeks ago. Apparently they are still burying articles on gun rights, afraid to let countervailing ideas compete freely in the marketplace. What does that tell you?

The Liberty Sphere: Second Amendment News Roundup for 3/13/09

It's a rainy day here in Raleigh, NC. We needed it, and it gives one an opportunity to go and read The Liberty Sphere: Second Amendment News Roundup for 3/13/09. Thanks and a hat tip to the Welshman.

About those troops in Alabama

Finally, for today,
Sipsey Street Irregulars has more skinny on what the troops were actually doing in Samson, AL after the shooting. Go read it all, and judge for yourself. Personally, I find this excedingly disturbing.

Multiple victim public homicide: Alabama & Germany shootings

What are the lessons of these and earlier public shootings? Gun control groups will push for additional laws to follow those they consider inadequate. Gun rights groups will talk about individual rights and the failure of previous laws. The question: Which public policies will most likely stem the problem of multiple victim public homicide?

read more | digg story

Another school shooting brings gun control to the fore

Yesterday's school shooting in Germany once again ignited the debate about gun control and whether even stricter laws could prevent future tragedy. But Germany already has some of the strictest gun laws in the world. But nevermind, we need stricter gun laws.

read more digg story

Wrong reactions to shooting sprees make us more vulnerable

It is clear that an evil, abnormal freak's actions are being manipulated to make the rest of us even more vulnerable to such monsters. You can bank on it that the gun grabbers will tell us that we need to get rid of guns every time a nutcase cracks. Here's the thing though: that gun did not suddenly spring to life, jump into that man's hands, and fire itself. The evil is in the man, not in the gun. A gun was merely this man's tool.
read more digg story

Will AL shooter bring 'assault weapon' ban to front burner?

Will this be a triggering event to renew the push to ban semi-autos? We can expect to see the Bradys and the Obama team exploit this. Much like a crisis, a good tragedy is not to be wasted. Rep. Carolyn McCarthy already has a bill ginned up. Pelosi can be expected to schedule it for a vote. The supposed "blue dogs" will go along to get more pork from the next bill in order to buy votes. The NRA, seeing it will pass with or without them, will compromise rather than stand on principle. Next thing you know, your hunting rifle will be banned, and Eric Holder will be telling you to cough up the guns. What will you do then, huh?

read more digg story

Would George Washington want us to acquiesce to tyranny?

Coalition to Stop Gun Violence president Mike Beard makes the bizarre argument that George Washington would have supported the CSGV’s "government monopoly on force" idea. But he can only make this argument by ignoring the fact that George Washington assumed the government would obey the constitution. It has not.

read more digg story

Gun control, pro-choice women, and the Brady Campaign

Gun control laws threaten to leave millions of women importuning violent predators for their lives, and sometimes those predators are their husbands. Violent criminals ignore restraining orders, just like they ignore laws designed to "keep guns out of the hands of violent criminals." Rather than infringe on citizens' rights, lawmakers and enforcers should concentrate on putting these guys away. If a can not be trusted to carry a gun, he is can not be trusted to be walking around free.

read more | digg story

LA Gun Rights Examiner: The gun lobby outvotes D.C.? Not qui

A clear rebuttal to the push by anti-gun lobbyists to take power away from the people and give it to the government. More importantly, a clear statement that all "rights" belong to the citizen. The government has powers, but not rights. Go read.

read more | digg story

Trigger Angry Professors Need Psychological Evaluation

Mike Adams has an excellent article up today on Townhall.com entitled "Trigger Angry." Mike examines the the case of Central Connecticut State University student John Wahlberg, who had the temerity give a speech on the merits of student concealed carry in response to an assignment by Professor Paula Anderson. After class, Wahlberg found himself facing police interrogation, using information that they should not have been able to get their hands on. A quote from the article:

Professor Anderson’s actions were outrageous, partly because the questions police asked were so invasive. Imagine police presenting a gay professor with a list of his sex partners and then reminding him that sodomy is against the law. But, wait, sodomy is a constitutional right. Wahlberg was talking about gun ownership.

And:

I have to ask the obvious: Does Professor Anderson think discussing sex makes one a rapist? Would she take seriously anyone who held such a view? Should anyone who discusses sex be hauled into the police station, reminded that rape is illegal, and asked whether every sex act he had was consensual?

Go read the whole thing.

The last line of defense against tyranny, or the first line?

Gun owners who think of themselves as the "last line of defense against tyranny" might be setting themselves up to be too late. Rather, the armed citizen properly viewed, should be involved in politics at all levels.I had a little taste of the disdain some hunting enthusiasts seem to hold for people such as myself at the Dixie Deer Classic this weekend. While conservation, the latest turkey calls, and so on are all important, hunters need to stand shoulder to shoulder with gun rights folks. I do not hunt, but I recognize the need for, and value of hunting. I would urge hunters to do the same. After all, just as "gun control" is not about guns but control, so "gun rights" are not about guns, but rights.

read more digg story

Baiting liberals for fun and profit!

After 16 years of political action, I remain stunned by liberals' self-delusion. At digg.com, they use automated scripts to "bury" articles, effectively censoring them. This, they assure us, is not censorship. It is "democracy." Unlike attempts to censor me, I am giving them a voice: Here are their comments and my replies. More on the Digg fiasco from Paul Valone, leader of GRNC.

read more digg story

Tyranny is counting on ignorance

This is the American electorate. These are the people who cancel and overwhelm your vote.

read more | digg story

Sworn to Uphold Constitution No Matter What

Suppose a military or police officer receives a direct order that requires him/her to defy the U.S. Constitution, which they have sworn to uphold and defend? One group in particular, Oath Keepers, says the Constitution must be upheld even if it means disobeying direct orders.

read more digg story

'No Guns for Negroes'

JPFO takes off the gloves. We cannot be afraid to discuss the racist roots of citizen disarmament, and why what started out as a way to keep the disenfranchised down is intended to disenfranchise us all.

read more | digg story

The War on Guns: Just Like a Real Dictatorship

The War on Guns: Just Like a <i>Real</i> Dictatorship

This is actual legislation, sponsored by a real United States Congressman. Unbelievable. At least it has no other sponsors. There are rumblings, the latest from Sen. Byrd, that the executive branch is grabbing too much power. So maybe we will see a resurgence of back bone in the Congress yet.

Interestingly, our Constitution defined a Government with relatively equal powers between the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial Branches. Other countries have alternatively strong executive, or strong legislative forms of Government. Let's hope we don't go down the path of the strong executive.

The complaints about an "Imperial Presidency" seem to only come when a President is a Republican, but the fact is that the Executive has been accruing power since Teddy Roosevelt. It needs to be stopped, and turned back, if Americans are going to retain any freedom at all.

The Breda Fallacy: Rule III

The Breda Fallacy: Rule III

You have to see this short video over at The Breda Fallacy. I was at once rolling with laughter, and at the same time everything he says is true. Go see it. I especially loved the Michael Moore impersonation, and the rapid, but not so subtle dig at the way Moore edits films to get them to say what he wants.

FREEDOM: What the left wing of 'digg' cannot 'bury'

While much has been said of liberal censorship via proposals for “Fairness Doctrine,” censorship is already being directed at conservative, particularly pro-gun, voices on the Internet. At digg.com, left wing activists of the Daily Kos bent are working to “bury” pro-freedom articles ...

read more | digg story

The War on Guns: New Black Panthers Demonstrate Responsible Gun Use?

The War on Guns: New Black Panthers Demonstrate Responsible Gun Use?

Over at the War on Guns, David Codrea has a great article on the New Black Panthers use of arms. You see, children, the Second Amendment isn't just for white guys, or rich guys (who often can afford to hire body guards) or politicians (who have the police at their disposal.) No, the Second Amendment is for everybody. Is this what Eric Holder meant by being willing to engage?

Laura Hollis has another great article today on Townhall.com,, rhetorically taking David Brooks out to the woodshed. Brooks was publicly lamenting that the moderate centrist guy he elected president turned out to be a *gasp!* Communist. Here's the money quote from Brook's piece:

Those of us who consider ourselves moderates — moderate-conservative, in my case — are forced to confront the reality that Barack Obama is not who we thought he was. His words are responsible; his character is inspiring. But his actions betray a transformational liberalism that should put every centrist on notice. As Clive Crook, an Obama admirer, wrote in The Financial Times, the Obama budget “contains no trace of compromise. It makes no gesture, however small, however costless to its larger agenda, of a bipartisan approach to the great questions it addresses. It is a liberal’s dream of a new New Deal.”

Laura Hollis warned of this, had David Brooks cared to read or investigate for himself, as did Thomas Sowell, David Limbaugh, and any number of lesser known lights. Here is but one example of an ordinary guy, doing his own research and posting on the web.

Now, David Brooks works for the New York Times, the "paper of record," the most mainstream of the Mainstream Media (MSM). He had the resources at his disposal, presumably, to find out just who Barack Obama really was, and to inform the rest of us before the other half of the population voted for this guy. Even if his editors would not have given him staff to do the research, surely he could have done it on his own. The sources others used are not that deeply buried. They did not rely on exclusive, anonymous sources. It would be a case of gross journalistic malpractice if Mr. Brooks truly did not know or understand who the "One" was. But I don't believe Brooks committed malpractice, and I also don't believe his is simply an incompetent boob. Which leave that the MSM knew exactly what it was getting, even salivated over the prospect, but is now having second thoughts. The best laid plans, Mr. Brooks?

Old Business

Remeber when I wrote to Congressman David E. Price, Democrat about H.R. 45 here? I posted that I would update you if I got a response, though I didn't really expect one. Well, I got a response. Price's staff must be paying more attention to constituents these days. I have copied it from the e-mail below:

March 3, 2009



xx. xxxxxxxxxxxx

xxxx xxxxxxx xx

xxxxxxx, xx xxxxx


Dear Mr. xxxxxxxx:



Thank you for contacting me regarding H.R. 45, the Blair Holt's Firearm Licensing and Record of Sale Act of 2009. It is good to hear from you.



I have been a consistent supporter of the ability of law-abiding citizens to own and use guns for self-protection, hunting, and sporting purposes, while supporting reasonable measures to keep guns away from individuals who would use them to threaten or harm other people.



As you may know, H.R. 45 would amend the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act to create a new licensing system for purchasers of certain firearms. The bill would also create a system to track the sales records of these firearms. H.R. 45 defines the firearms subject to this licensing and tracking system as handguns and any semiautomatic firearms that can accept a detachable ammunition device, excluding antiques. Additionally, the measure directs the Attorney General to collect firearm injury information and conduct research of firearm-related deaths and injuries.



The bill has been referred to the House Judiciary Committee for consideration. Should the House consider the bill, I will evaluate it carefully, keeping your concerns in mind.



Again, thank you for contacting me, and please continue to keep in touch on issues of concern.





Sincerely,


DAVID PRICE

Member of Congress

Doesn't say much, but at least it is a response. Mr. Price earned an F from the GAO, which gives me little hope that he will resist the urge to further infringe on our rights, but he is now on notice of where one of his constituents stands

Three Samples

I wanted to share a three samples from my reading today, while I work on the post from several days ago. The first is from the always spot on Thomas Sowell with his article today Talk Is Cheap. His point is that talk really isn't cheap, that the generation that voted for Hitler might, if they could, tell you to beware the silver tongued monster. The whole article should be used as a quote, but let me just quote one paragraph, which point I have made here before:

Do not for one moment think that we are either intellectually or morally superior to those Germans who put Hitler in power. We have been saved by our institutions and our traditions-- the very institutions and traditions that so many are so busy eroding or dismantling, whether in classrooms or court rooms or in the halls of Congress and the White House.

Then there is the article This is Way Bigger than Rush by David Limbaugh defending his brother, but making the larger point that the real target of those who are trying to tear down Rush is us. The money quote:

Rush is the target because he represents the real opposition. He's the leading voice for those who are really standing up for America and its founding ideals. Too much of our opposition is nominal only. Too much of our opposition is unaware we're in a war for the very survival of those precious principles.

For the record, I listen to Rush whenever I can, and proudly so. In a PC world, Rush says what needs to be said without sugar coating. He also has fun doing it, which makes his audience have fun along with him. Rush daily counters, by both words and deeds, the Left's notions about what conservatives are, which must make them squirm. I am sure that this blog will not end up in El Rushbo's Amazing Stack of Stuff, but if it did, I would like to say mega dittos to Rush.

Finally, there is this, from the Front Sight training center. I leave it up to you to decide whether this guy has any credibility or not, whether he is a traitor or a patriot, but I pass it along to show you how loud the cries of "Enough! Don't Tread On Me" are getting. 48% of the people did not vote for Obama, and of those who did, I hear stories of buyers remorse every day. And I pray daily that our Nation does not devolve to violent revolution.