Every Blade of Grass: Political Quotations
The last quote from Henry Waxman should cause great concern for every patriot.
Sunday, October 14, 2012
Saturday, October 13, 2012
Creeping Socialism
For those who don't know what socialism is like in actual practice, I have often suggested you read accounts of it from people who lived through it in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. Some people seem to believe a little socialism is perhaps needed in our society. In fact, we have more than a little socialism. But of course, a little socialism is never enough, and eventually we have the entire package. That has been the goal of the Progressives all along.
I have featured a few people lived through socialism and miraculously became refugees here in the United States. Now comes Virginia Prodan with an article at the American Thinker entitled Socialism: Against Gold, Guns, and God. Ms. Prodan lived during the reign of Ceaucescu in Romania, and escaped to the United States. What she sees going on now looks to her like another reign of a failed ideology: socialism. You have all the hallmarks, including a cult like leader, a belief in social justice and "fairness," taxing the "rich" who should pay their "fair share." Given another four years, we will not be able to recognize this country anymore. I recommend you read the whole piece. Meanwhile, I will attend the movie Atlas Shrugged II, written by another refugee from Communism. Update: Also listen to this Hungarian born billionaire talking about the effects of socialism on his native country.
I have featured a few people lived through socialism and miraculously became refugees here in the United States. Now comes Virginia Prodan with an article at the American Thinker entitled Socialism: Against Gold, Guns, and God. Ms. Prodan lived during the reign of Ceaucescu in Romania, and escaped to the United States. What she sees going on now looks to her like another reign of a failed ideology: socialism. You have all the hallmarks, including a cult like leader, a belief in social justice and "fairness," taxing the "rich" who should pay their "fair share." Given another four years, we will not be able to recognize this country anymore. I recommend you read the whole piece. Meanwhile, I will attend the movie Atlas Shrugged II, written by another refugee from Communism. Update: Also listen to this Hungarian born billionaire talking about the effects of socialism on his native country.
Thursday, October 11, 2012
Things You Hope Not to Use, But Aren't You Glad You Have Them?
Some things you probably have, but you hope and pray that you never have to use:
-Seat belts: You don't intend to have an accident. You drive carefully, and defensively. But sometimes an accident finds you. At that moment, when the seat belts in your car prevent you from flying through the windshield, aren't you glad you have them?
-Automobile insurance: Same scenario, but your car has been totaled by an uninsured driver. Aren't you glad you have insurance to replace your only means of transportation?
-Fire extinguishers: You probably have a fire extinguisher in your kitchen. You don't intend to have a fire in your home, or to burn your home down. But aren't you glad you have them to prevent your house burning down?
-Home insurance: Speaking of homes, you wouldn't go without home insurance, would you? This insurance package protects your largest investment from all sorts of physical hazards, as well as lawsuits from people who may slip and fall on your steps.
-Guns: When you are confronted by a person who is threatening to kill you, there likely won't be a policeman around. There won't likely be a national guardsman on hand, and there probably won't be a witness around either. You are on your own. Indeed, you, yourself, are the first responder. Wouldn't it be nice to have a gun on your hip?
Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Judges Go Rogue
I was disappointed to read that once again, appellate justices, in this case for the state of New York, are willing to violate both the letter and the spirit of the law to achieve an anti-gun agenda. You can read about it at the Insurance Journal in an article entitled Court Rules New York Shooting Victim can Sue Gun Maker by Daniel Weissner.
What is so upsetting about this is that once again we see government workers, in this case Judges, who feel perfectly comfortable with treating the law as silly putty, to be molded into whatever suits their desired outcome. We see Judges who don't mind abrogating the law, about which legislators considered, held hearings and committee meetings, various members of the public had comments, and both houses passed before the bill was signed into law. These judges have no authority to do that. Their authority goes only to interpreting the law, not dismissing it, unless the law was passed outside the Constitutional authority of the legislative branch, or is Unconstitutional for some other reason. But that is not the case. This is lawlessness, and it needs to stop.
The law I am discussing here is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The act on its face prevents cities and states from suing manufacturers of firearms for the criminal misuse by someone who happened to acquire their product, whether by purchase, or by stealing it. But beyond firearms, it also protects any other manufacturer from being sued for misuse, or criminal use of its products. Can you imagine if Ford were held responsible for every death due to drunk drivers of its automobiles? If this lawsuit is allowed to go forward, and precedent is set, how many things that we now enjoy would simply be unavailable in the future. I doubt that anyone would be building swimming pools, for instance, because the insurance costs would be prohibitive. And what about knives or baseball bats: can Craftsman be sued because a screw driver that Sears sold in 1960 was used to murder someone last week?
The judges on this panel show an arrogance that seems to take the breath away. They have substituted its judgement and wisdom for that of 535 members of Congress acting within their Constitutional authority. I know that I rail against legislators who don't pass things I think they should, but I don't advocate breaking the law. But if I don't advocate breaking the law for citizens, even more especially, judges and others who work for the government should respect the law, and their duties under the law. If a law has been passed within the authority granted to the government by the people, whether someone agrees with it or not, it should be respected. When someone breaks the law, and is seen to by others, and he is not punished, then the rule of law begins to break down, and soon enough we are in a Hobbesian world. Our society can not function on that basis.
What is so upsetting about this is that once again we see government workers, in this case Judges, who feel perfectly comfortable with treating the law as silly putty, to be molded into whatever suits their desired outcome. We see Judges who don't mind abrogating the law, about which legislators considered, held hearings and committee meetings, various members of the public had comments, and both houses passed before the bill was signed into law. These judges have no authority to do that. Their authority goes only to interpreting the law, not dismissing it, unless the law was passed outside the Constitutional authority of the legislative branch, or is Unconstitutional for some other reason. But that is not the case. This is lawlessness, and it needs to stop.
The law I am discussing here is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act. The act on its face prevents cities and states from suing manufacturers of firearms for the criminal misuse by someone who happened to acquire their product, whether by purchase, or by stealing it. But beyond firearms, it also protects any other manufacturer from being sued for misuse, or criminal use of its products. Can you imagine if Ford were held responsible for every death due to drunk drivers of its automobiles? If this lawsuit is allowed to go forward, and precedent is set, how many things that we now enjoy would simply be unavailable in the future. I doubt that anyone would be building swimming pools, for instance, because the insurance costs would be prohibitive. And what about knives or baseball bats: can Craftsman be sued because a screw driver that Sears sold in 1960 was used to murder someone last week?
The judges on this panel show an arrogance that seems to take the breath away. They have substituted its judgement and wisdom for that of 535 members of Congress acting within their Constitutional authority. I know that I rail against legislators who don't pass things I think they should, but I don't advocate breaking the law. But if I don't advocate breaking the law for citizens, even more especially, judges and others who work for the government should respect the law, and their duties under the law. If a law has been passed within the authority granted to the government by the people, whether someone agrees with it or not, it should be respected. When someone breaks the law, and is seen to by others, and he is not punished, then the rule of law begins to break down, and soon enough we are in a Hobbesian world. Our society can not function on that basis.
Tuesday, October 9, 2012
Waking Up in a Different Country
I have featured several pieces by Daren Jonescu in the past. He is an excellent writer, and has a grasp of the Leftist mind that I can only think comes from living under Communist rule. I do not know that, but it has seemed to me that he writes with the authority one who has lived it. Such is today's piece entitled Time to Demythologize the Authoritarian Impulse published by the American Thinker. Go and read the whole article, then come back. I will have some comments.
We have been losing our liberties a small piece at a time for over a hundred years. We have been losing our freedoms, and our abilities to determine our own lives and happiness. We have also been enslaved. Oh, not in the classical sense of a slave being owned by another, who can do with him what he wants, but in the strictest sense of being forced to work for an other's benefit. Care to see just who it is you are being enslaved to? Or how about her. We may laugh at these people, but who is getting something for nothing here?
The excuses for taking away some piece of our liberty have been many and varied. Perhaps it was a crime spree, such as during Prohibition, where gangsters sought to feed the demand for liquor by selling illegal smuggled booze. To protect their illegal goods, however, they couldn't call upon the police, so they were forced to supply their own security. They ended up killing innocents as well as other gangsters, not being particularly finicky about who got hurt. Perhaps it was a war, or a trumped up environmental hazard. Perhaps people have been stampeded into accepting security checkpoints at airports and along highways because of fear of terrorists. Why doesn't really matter. What matters is they have stampeded people into going along with it because they to be saved from whatever evil is being trumpeted, and they are willing to sacrifice some of their liberty for safety. Unfortunately, the promise of safety is never delivered, but people have lost their liberty none the less. This is the true evil that is Progressivism.
In recent years, I have become ever more alarmed. With the majority of my life in the rear view mirror, I can see how our freedoms have been taken from us, and I have tried sounding the alarm. All too often, as Mrs. PolyKahr points out, I just come across as a crank. When GM was in trouble, and about to go into bankruptcy, the Left set up a drum beat that bankruptcy would mean the end of GM. I pointed out that some unproductive parts of the company might close, and that a number of contracts would be renegotiated to save other parts, but that the company would emerge from bankruptcy stronger than it was. Instead, our bankruptcy laws were tossed out, and the President substituted his own ad hoc rules. In taking this action, the President destroyed the rule of law that has governed this nation since the ratification of the Constitution. Now, every case potentially becomes a matter of who are the parties involved, who are the victims, how has the press treated the case, If the victims are part of a protected minority, of course they will get sympathetic press. On the other hand, of the victims are part of the designated oppressor class, the case will be ignored.
Despite claims to the contrary, ObamaCare really will take over 1/6th of the United States economy. It really does take what were your, and your family's private decisions about your health care, and put these decisions into the hands of unelected bureaucrats in Washington. As we have seen with Catholic charities, it destroys the protection of religions freedoms in the First Amendment, unless you are a Muslim. But more than that, it is an intolerable act of tyranny. The founding generation would be rolling over in their graves.
The Fast and Furious scandal shows the moral depravity to which tyrants will stoop, and how far they will go to cover it up. The Leftist press has tried to use the Staling excuse "If Uncle Barry only knew!" Personally, I believe BHO did know, and has the blood of hundreds of innocent Mexicans on his hands, as does Attorney General Holder, and those lower level persons named in the IG report. I believe that because in a bureaucracy nobody is going to take on more risk that the potential rewards. There was a huge risk that the Fast and Furious operation could get out of hand, but where were the rewards for lower level civil servants?
Tyrants are lurking everywhere. Your homeowners association probably has at least one "grass nazi" who goes about measuring the lawns and playing "gotcha." Or, perhaps it will have an architectural committee that wants all the houses to have the same color paint on the front doors, or the mailboxes. You imagine that Hitler was seen in his own day as evil, but the fact is that he was a rock star to the German people. Many felt that it had been Hitler's policies that had pulled them out of the depression that had impoverished them only a few years earlier, and they were grateful. Similarly, when the Russian secret police came and took someone, the Russians generally thought they were doing it against Uncle Joe's orders. If only Stalin knew! Saddam Hussein ruled in Iraq despite the fact that Iraq was awash in fully automatic AK 47s. Tyranny is never really like George Orwell's 1984. Someone can be likable, and personally popular, and still be a tyrant. With all that in mind, if you are one of those who keeps saying that it can't happen here, wake up, open your eyes, and look around. You won't recognize your country anymore.
We have been losing our liberties a small piece at a time for over a hundred years. We have been losing our freedoms, and our abilities to determine our own lives and happiness. We have also been enslaved. Oh, not in the classical sense of a slave being owned by another, who can do with him what he wants, but in the strictest sense of being forced to work for an other's benefit. Care to see just who it is you are being enslaved to? Or how about her. We may laugh at these people, but who is getting something for nothing here?
The excuses for taking away some piece of our liberty have been many and varied. Perhaps it was a crime spree, such as during Prohibition, where gangsters sought to feed the demand for liquor by selling illegal smuggled booze. To protect their illegal goods, however, they couldn't call upon the police, so they were forced to supply their own security. They ended up killing innocents as well as other gangsters, not being particularly finicky about who got hurt. Perhaps it was a war, or a trumped up environmental hazard. Perhaps people have been stampeded into accepting security checkpoints at airports and along highways because of fear of terrorists. Why doesn't really matter. What matters is they have stampeded people into going along with it because they to be saved from whatever evil is being trumpeted, and they are willing to sacrifice some of their liberty for safety. Unfortunately, the promise of safety is never delivered, but people have lost their liberty none the less. This is the true evil that is Progressivism.
In recent years, I have become ever more alarmed. With the majority of my life in the rear view mirror, I can see how our freedoms have been taken from us, and I have tried sounding the alarm. All too often, as Mrs. PolyKahr points out, I just come across as a crank. When GM was in trouble, and about to go into bankruptcy, the Left set up a drum beat that bankruptcy would mean the end of GM. I pointed out that some unproductive parts of the company might close, and that a number of contracts would be renegotiated to save other parts, but that the company would emerge from bankruptcy stronger than it was. Instead, our bankruptcy laws were tossed out, and the President substituted his own ad hoc rules. In taking this action, the President destroyed the rule of law that has governed this nation since the ratification of the Constitution. Now, every case potentially becomes a matter of who are the parties involved, who are the victims, how has the press treated the case, If the victims are part of a protected minority, of course they will get sympathetic press. On the other hand, of the victims are part of the designated oppressor class, the case will be ignored.
Despite claims to the contrary, ObamaCare really will take over 1/6th of the United States economy. It really does take what were your, and your family's private decisions about your health care, and put these decisions into the hands of unelected bureaucrats in Washington. As we have seen with Catholic charities, it destroys the protection of religions freedoms in the First Amendment, unless you are a Muslim. But more than that, it is an intolerable act of tyranny. The founding generation would be rolling over in their graves.
The Fast and Furious scandal shows the moral depravity to which tyrants will stoop, and how far they will go to cover it up. The Leftist press has tried to use the Staling excuse "If Uncle Barry only knew!" Personally, I believe BHO did know, and has the blood of hundreds of innocent Mexicans on his hands, as does Attorney General Holder, and those lower level persons named in the IG report. I believe that because in a bureaucracy nobody is going to take on more risk that the potential rewards. There was a huge risk that the Fast and Furious operation could get out of hand, but where were the rewards for lower level civil servants?
Tyrants are lurking everywhere. Your homeowners association probably has at least one "grass nazi" who goes about measuring the lawns and playing "gotcha." Or, perhaps it will have an architectural committee that wants all the houses to have the same color paint on the front doors, or the mailboxes. You imagine that Hitler was seen in his own day as evil, but the fact is that he was a rock star to the German people. Many felt that it had been Hitler's policies that had pulled them out of the depression that had impoverished them only a few years earlier, and they were grateful. Similarly, when the Russian secret police came and took someone, the Russians generally thought they were doing it against Uncle Joe's orders. If only Stalin knew! Saddam Hussein ruled in Iraq despite the fact that Iraq was awash in fully automatic AK 47s. Tyranny is never really like George Orwell's 1984. Someone can be likable, and personally popular, and still be a tyrant. With all that in mind, if you are one of those who keeps saying that it can't happen here, wake up, open your eyes, and look around. You won't recognize your country anymore.
Sunday, October 7, 2012
This Just In-Nothing Still Happening
Well, alright, I admit this came out on Friday, and it is now Sunday, but the news still needs to get out: after a year with having concealed carry of firearms in restaurants that serve alcohol, nothing much has happened. The Columbus Dispatch has the story by Alan Johnson here. The anti-gun Cleveland Plain Dealer's snarky article entitled Letting Guns into Ohio's Bars would be an outrage was typical of what passed as coverage before the law went into effect. You can read it for yourself. The article is long on sarcasm, and short on actual facts.
Like Virginia last year, once again a State has passed carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, and nothing happened. No shoot outs among the chairs and aisles, no blood on the floors, no wild west scenes, no dead children. Nothing.
So, you might wonder, what causes the North Carolina legislature to fear concealed carriers having their guns in restaurants while they dine with their families? It seems that Senator Tom Apadoca had the power, in conjunction with Senate Leadership, Phil Berger to kill this common sense law for us again. But what seems to be scaring them so badly? Do they believe that those living in our fair state are somehow more violence prone than those living in 42 other states? Perhaps it is the Fraternal Order of Police, a hypocritical group that seems to believe in guns for themselves, but not for civilians. It couldn't be newspapers like the Winston Salem Journal that claim that guns and alcohol don't mix could it? After all, the proposed bill didn't allow alcohol and guns to mix. Indeed, the the proposed bill actually forbade it. But setting up strawmen in order to knock them down seems to be a specialty of the Winston Salem Journal.
It remains to be seen whether pro-gun rights forces can increase their numbers in the November elections, and whether North Carolina will join states like Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, and of course Ohio in having concealed carry in restaurants that serve alcohol.
Like Virginia last year, once again a State has passed carry in restaurants that serve alcohol, and nothing happened. No shoot outs among the chairs and aisles, no blood on the floors, no wild west scenes, no dead children. Nothing.
So, you might wonder, what causes the North Carolina legislature to fear concealed carriers having their guns in restaurants while they dine with their families? It seems that Senator Tom Apadoca had the power, in conjunction with Senate Leadership, Phil Berger to kill this common sense law for us again. But what seems to be scaring them so badly? Do they believe that those living in our fair state are somehow more violence prone than those living in 42 other states? Perhaps it is the Fraternal Order of Police, a hypocritical group that seems to believe in guns for themselves, but not for civilians. It couldn't be newspapers like the Winston Salem Journal that claim that guns and alcohol don't mix could it? After all, the proposed bill didn't allow alcohol and guns to mix. Indeed, the the proposed bill actually forbade it. But setting up strawmen in order to knock them down seems to be a specialty of the Winston Salem Journal.
It remains to be seen whether pro-gun rights forces can increase their numbers in the November elections, and whether North Carolina will join states like Tennessee, Kentucky, Virginia, and of course Ohio in having concealed carry in restaurants that serve alcohol.
Saturday, October 6, 2012
Interview with a Gun Carrier
Tim Schmidt of U. S. Concealed Carry Association publishes an email with helpful articles about carrying concealed on a daily basis. One, that I thought ought to be highlighted was this: Mindset Interviews: Interview One-JS. JS has the sound of someone who authentically carries on a daily basis. The interview discusses his early work in law enforcement, and his subsequent carry experience as a civilian.
He expresses frustration at the way a civilian can be entrapped by violating one of the many invisible lines that one may cross during the day. He talks about the passivity that the relative safety we experience causes some people to assume. He discusses the criminal element, and the criminal mindset, and the mindset that the average person needs to avoid becoming a victim. One of the things he said during the interview struck me as being particularly true:
The interview sounds to me like the truth. The attitudes of JS toward criminals, and his determiniation that he won't be victimized ring true to me, as well as his attitude about avoiding trouble whenever he can. But in choosing to see the world as it is, rather than as he might want it to be, he has made the overt decision to go armed throughout life. I understand. Go read the whole article. It is a very good interview with a level headed guy.
He expresses frustration at the way a civilian can be entrapped by violating one of the many invisible lines that one may cross during the day. He talks about the passivity that the relative safety we experience causes some people to assume. He discusses the criminal element, and the criminal mindset, and the mindset that the average person needs to avoid becoming a victim. One of the things he said during the interview struck me as being particularly true:
CA – As a civilian, since you got your permit at 21. Have you ever went around, even for a moment, with a vigilante attitude? You know, an attitude that you will take steps to enforce the laws.
JS – Not in the slightest. In fact, carrying a gun has me avoiding places I might have gone to before carrying a gun. The simple fact of being armed in public makes a person more self-aware. That self-awareness helps out with making good decisions to avoid trouble. I had the choice when driving home to either take a shortcut through a bad section of town or drive around. I used to take the shortcut. After I was trained to use a gun, it just made more sense to drive around.
It really is not complicated. People who do not carry a gun should learn this part. They need to understand that I am used to carrying a gun every day. It is part of my mindset in that I refuse to be a victim. I do not go to places being paranoid. I just go places with a tool that could save my life one day. I actually choose to avoid the very hint of trouble. I walk away, drive around or do not go. If there are reports of trouble brewing for a public event I might like to attend, I stay home. The goal is to never have to use the gun. The goal is to not ever be harmed, which is why I carry a gun. It is a last resort type of thing.I remember shortly after getting my concealed carry permit, I was in a Borders store. A young man was listening to music through earphones, and singing along to the tunes he was hearing. It was loud, and disruptive to the others in the store, myself included. My first instinct was to suggest that he not sing along in the middle of the store. Then I remembered that I was carrying a gun, and that by confronting the young man, I would be creating a situation that could escalate out of hand. I turned and walked out of the store. I have lived by the notion ever since that in any possible confrontation, I know there is at least one gun, mine, and I try to avoid such situations.
The interview sounds to me like the truth. The attitudes of JS toward criminals, and his determiniation that he won't be victimized ring true to me, as well as his attitude about avoiding trouble whenever he can. But in choosing to see the world as it is, rather than as he might want it to be, he has made the overt decision to go armed throughout life. I understand. Go read the whole article. It is a very good interview with a level headed guy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)