This Is Where We Are Failing
I had to pick up one of my kids today, and as luck would have it, I was getting my fill of Rush Limbaugh while we were in the car. She doesn’t see the value of the information that Rush produces, and was eager to change the station to something more palatable to teenage ears. She almost lost her fingers.
But it got me thinking a little bit about what teens think about today’s topics. I first talked about a bill filed in the Iowa House to make it legal for dairy farmers to sell unpasteurized milk. It seems that right now, if a farmer were to do that, he stands the very real risk of losing his farm and being thrown in jail.
I then chose a topic that has been making the rounds lately, that being the mandate by the Comrade-In-Chief about contraceptives and abortions being guaranteed by health insurance companies. I figured that since she was a girl, perhaps this would be a topic more interesting to her. In the end, neither was making much of an impact.
So I put it on very basic terms. I told her to pretend that she was running her own cupcake shop, and the Feds came in and told her that she had to sell chocolate cupcakes. No questions asked. And, she had to sell those chocolate cupcakes to anyone who came into the store, and it didn’t matter if she lost money on the deal, she was allergic to chocolate, the customers were stealing from her… none of that mattered. She would make the cupcakes, sell the cupcakes, and be happy about it because the Feds told her to do so. How would that make her feel?
She said she’d have to do it because that’s the government. If they tell you to do something, you have to do it.
I think I bent the steering wheel.
I tried to explain to her that the Constitution was written to keep the government from doing exactly what I just described. She replied with the comment that it didn’t matter what the Constitution says, the government is going to do what the government wants to do, and that’s just the way it is.
And that, dear readers, is how we are going to lose this republic. If our next generation believes that the government is going to do whatever it wants, and the Constitution cannot protect us from those actions, then we’ve lost the war before it even gets started.
And I’m sure that’s just what the Department of Education and the Comrade-in-Chief are hoping for.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Share” the posts on Facebook and Google+, “RT” them on Twitter, and submit them to StumbleUpon. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Putting the Brakes on Traffic Enforcement Cameras
The House Transportation Committee today passed HF 2048 on a 15-6 vote. HF 2048 would prohibit all speed and red-light enforcement cameras statewide. With today’s passage, the bill will now go to the full House for debate and a vote on the floor.
Governor Branstad has said that he will sign this legislation if it ever reaches his desk. However, the fly in the ointment will be Senate Majority Leader Mike Gronstal, who has said that he believes traffic enforcement cameras serve a purpose and they work to reduce accidents and enhance public safety.
Here we go again – usurping individual rights and liberties for “public safety.” It’s a damn shame that the wise leaders who founded this country didn’t have a better grasp on what public safety was all about. If they did, they could have removed the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” from one of our founding principles. I appreciate the Senator Gronstal has been a supporter of firearms rights in Iowa lately, but on this topic, he is completely off base. While the introduction of automated traffic enforcement devices might have played a part in reduced accidents, there can be no doubt that issuing citations to a driver based on a picture of the license plate and not on confirmation that the person was actually behind the wheel puts the burden of proof on the citizen, not on the government. That goes against every concept that is supposed to be the bedrock of our judicial system.
To all the legislators who believe it is proper to have these systems in place, I would like to ask one simple question: would you be comfortable being found automatically guilty of an infraction, no matter how big or small, with no proof of the action being tendered by the government other than a photo of your property at the scene? That is what happens with these cameras, and that is not how we as a society were meant to live.
Some might say it’s just a traffic ticket with no points, go ahead and pay it. If so, where does that end? What defines a penalty as too big or too small? $100? $500? How about incarceration? 24 hours? 48 hours? ”It’s just a day in jail, suck it up and be glad it wasn’t longer.” If you think that can’t happen, then you have not studied history.
Others might say that 99% of the time, the registered owner is behind the wheel. That’s making an assumption of guilt, as opposed to a presumption of innocence, and again, where does that end?
These are troubled times, and we are continuing to slide down a slippery slope. We need our local and state politicians to protect the rights that we are supposed to have, not to trample on them because it is convenient and it provides money for the treasury. We have enough of that in Washington. We don’t need it in Des Moines. If this legislation passes in the House and gets stifled in the Senate, it needs to be a defining issue the next time Senator Gronstal (or any other Senator who votes against it) comes up for an election.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Share” the posts on Facebook and Google+, “RT” them on Twitter, and submit them to StumbleUpon. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Iran Threatens Terrorism
News surfaced today in several sources that Iran is becoming more belligerent toward the west, and especially toward the United States. With the Al Qaeda network being hampered by US military action in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, Iran seems to believe that the only way it can regain its place as the country that will stand up and keep the US at bay is to take the fight to our soil and inflict terror right here between the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. (Here is an article in The Washington Post that details this story.)
I’ve got three words for Iran: bring it on.
Of course, that all depends on what our government is going to do about the threat, too. If we, as a nation, are going to cower down and run like scared children over the threat of terrorism, then my three words really won’t make any sense. It would be very easy for our government to take these threats and do things like spend more money on the TSA and DHS, expanding their programs beyond those that are already sucking funds out of the US Treasury and robbing citizens of their freedoms, and doing nothing for our overall safety. On the other hand, if as a nation we are going to stand tall and tell a bunch of third world petty thugs that we are not going to run for cover just because they say they are going to come over here and inflict pain, then “bring it on” is exactly the right thing to say.
This country was built on liberty and freedom. It was also built on courage. We did not expand beyond the 13 original colonies because we were afraid of what was on the other side of the Appalachian Mountains. We expanded because we were not afraid of what was out there, and we were not afraid to take the risk to find out. We have explored the depths of the oceans, the hearts of volcanoes, and the very outer reaches of space because of courage and a resolution to take the risks associated with those activities.
It is now time to do the same thing. We must not allow ourselves to be bullied into changing how we do business simply because a country on the other side of the world says they are going to kill people on our own soil. They may yet do that. There could even be another attack on the same magnitude as 9/11. But the fear of that happening cannot change how we live our lives on a daily basis. Most importantly, we cannot allow the threat of that to further bankrupt our country by spending money on homeland defense programs that we cannot afford.
The best homeland defense is one that employs citizens to be vigilant for things that are out of place, and allowing those same citizens to arm themselves for self-defense. How come terrorists chose airliners for their attacks on 9/11? Of course they were able to deliver a great deal of damage, but they were also safe havens. The terrorists knew that there was absolutely no way that anyone on board those planes could thwart their plans, since there were no weapons on board. Flight 93 never made it to its destination, but it still ended in tragedy for all on board.
It didn’t have to happen that way, and if we allow ourselves to live as our founding fathers intended, it will not happen that way again. Systematically removing our liberties in exchange for “safety” in the end grants us neither. History has shown this in the past time and time again, and no amount of wishful thinking by our government will change that.
“Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.”
How many crimes take place at gun shops? Shooting ranges? Karate studios? Any place where people have the means and the will to defend themselves? Do you think that terrorists are any less intelligent than our common criminals? They will always look for soft targets. Our goal as a society is to not give them one. Not because we allow TSA, DHS, FBI, NSA, CIA, or any other three letter agency to provide for our safety, but because we will ourselves to be strong, be vigilant, and be responsible for our self-defense.
What should we do about Iran? Dr. Jack Wheeler of To The Point News had something to say about it back in October of 2011:
This week we learned that Iran’s government planned an act of war against us in our own capital. It is hard to overestimate the number of problems in the world that would be solved with this government gone. And that’s the solution: regime change. Apply a straightforward Reagan Doctrine strategy to overthrow Iran’s mullah regime by sponsoring – with money and weapons – insurrections throughout the country.
Of Iran’s 78 million, over 20 million are ethnic Azeri – almost three times the number of Azeris in Azerbaijan next door, whom they would love to join in a Greater Azerbaijan. There are at least eight million Kurds, who would fight tooth and nail against their Tehran oppressors if we gave them support. There are three million Ahwazi Arabs who populate Iran’s oil patch, Kuhzestan, across the border from southern Iraq.
And of course there are the Persians themselves, some 33 million, whose mass street protests have been so brutally suppressed (and which the current president did not lift a finger or say a word to support).
A president determined to effect regime change in Iran would succeed quickly. The world’s main state sponsor of Islamic terrorism would be no more. Iraq would be free to flourish, Syria would be quickly liberated, the threat to the Saudi and Gulf oil fields would be removed, and of course, Iran’s nuclear program would be destroyed in the process (Israeli spec-ops would see to that).
It’s a long list of positives and few if any negatives. All it needs is a president with the courage of Ronald Reagan.
We do not need to take on Iran in a direct confrontation. We do not need to go over there, guns blazing, and inflict ourselves on a foreign country like we did with Iraq and Afghanistan. With the right “encouragement” the work can be done for us by those who are already over there. But that line of rational thinking probably escapes our current regime, who would be very happy to continue tearing up the Constitution and trampling on our freedoms all in the name of “safety first.”
Bring it on. I would rather live in a country where I am still able to live freely without government interference in my life, knowing that I could be injured or killed by a terrorist than to live in a country that is run by a tyrannic regime that is only concerned about protecting me.
We are at a crossroads in our country’s history. How our government responds will determine the value of our freedom and liberty.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Share” the posts on Facebook and Google+, “RT” them on Twitter, and submit them to StumbleUpon. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
HJR 2001 Passes Committee Vote
HJR 2001 just passed a House Natural Resources Committee vote 17-4. I’ll have more information on this in my Examiner post later today. With both versions of the bill passed (House and Senate), it’s time to get a floor vote on this and off to the Governor to sign!
DoJ Stands Up For Citizens
Just not for non-American citizens, or citizens who are Border Patrol agents.
On the heels of the still unresolved Fast & Furious scandal comes a story out of East Haven, Connecticut. It is reported that four police officers from East Haven were arrested for civil rights violations. According to the article:
All four officers were charged with conspiracy against rights. Spaulding was also charged with use of excessive force, making a false arrest and obstruction of justice. Zullo was also charged with use of excessive force. Cari faces the additional charges of making a false arrest and obstruction of justice. Miller was also charged with use of excessive force. The men face up to 20 years in prison and up to $250,000 in fines.
If true, these offices do need to be held accountable for their actions. But the Department of Justice tried to interject a sound bite that is so hypocritical that it made me want to regurgitate my breakfast:
U.S. Attorney David B. Fein said the “indictment should serve as a powerful message that we in the Department of Justice will not tolerate abuse of power or victimization of civilians by anyone in law enforcement.”
Right. Thanks for that piece of information, Mr. Fein. Perhaps your boss, Comrade AG Holder could take some that advice and come clean on the Fast & Furious scandal? Maybe those who are responsible for the deaths of Agent Terry and countless Mexican citizens could be held accountable for their actions?
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
The Tomorrow Plan
I spent about 45 minutes today listening to a presentation about “The Tomorrow Plan” in the West Des Moines City Council Chambers this afternoon. This is another way of saying “sustainable development.”
Interesting.
Those of you who are reading this and who are committed to preserving the liberty and freedom that our founding fathers envisioned for this country for all generations to come should begin to investigate what The Tomorrow Plan is all about. Even if you’re not in central Iowa, chances are that you’ve come in contact with something like this somewhere.
Let me first go on record by saying that I’m not at all against long term pragmatic thinking or planning when it comes to who we are going to develop the area for us and for future generations. Short-sightedness is poor planning, and it will not benefit those who come after us. But there’s a right way and a wrong way to do this.
For example, one of the things that the plan envisions is a “regional council” that will oversee strategic decisions for the area. Something similar to the DC area’s “Council of Governments” perhaps. A council that can make suggestions or set policies, but is not accountable to the people that they “represent” through direct elections. Not a good thing.
Something else that jumped right out at me looking over the plan’s goals was this gem:
Social equity, inclusion, and access to opportunity
“Social equity” is another name for socialism. The moment any government agency takes on the role of ensuring “social equity” as a goal, it immediately removes the concept of liberty. Liberty and equality cannot exist on the same plane. This needs to be a huge red flag going forward.
It was encouraging to see West Des Moines Mayor Steve Gaer express his concern and reservations about The Tomorrow Plan. In fact, he was most concerned about pigeon-holing residents into mandates that they don’t want. What was not so encouraging was listening to Councilman Ted Ohmart explain that an underlying reason for West Des Moines to take part in The Tomorrow Plan is the ability to secure future federal grants. According to Councilman Ohmart, West Des Moines gets the majority of federal funding from two agencies: DOT and HUD.
In other words, the ability to continue sucking at the federal teat.
West Des Moines (WDM), and every other town, city, county, and state, needs to stop taking milk from the federal cow. Money comes from Washington with strings attached. It would be far more preferable to hear WDM officials say that they are looking for ways to tighten belts and remove any dependence on Washington so we can stand on our own as a community and not be dependent on money that comes conditionally from halfway across the country.
Anything that deals with “sustainable development” is really lipstick on a pig called Agenda 21. The concept of Agenda 21 actually got its start back in 1987, when the United Nations Commission on Economic Development (UNCED) released a report called Our Common Future. This has morphed over time and more meetings into what is now know and Agenda 21. All for the good of the people and the environment.
Not so fast. One of the documents that Agenda 21 references is the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDoHR).” This document details the rights that all humans on the face of the earth should be guaranteed. Some are fairly standard, like being “free and equal in dignity and rights” or “the right to life, liberty, and security of person.” But as you read through the document, it gets troubling. There are many references to “rights” that are nothing more than a slap in the face to liberty. The right to compulsory education. The right to social security. The right to equal pay for equal work. None of these things are basic human rights, but they are part of Agenda 21 (albeit hidden). Of course, there is no mention of the right to keep and bear arms anywhere in the UDoHR. So only those who are in power (or those with special permission to enforce that power) will have the tools necessary to defend themselves. Not at all surprising.
I could go on, but my brain is still swimming around with this concept. I did find an essay that describes the dangers of “sustainable development” very eloquently. If you are interested in this topic, I strongly suggest that you take the time to read the essay, read the links I provided on Agenda 21 and The Tomorrow Plan, and research the topic even more. If you are in the greater Des Moines area, I would also suggest that you start paying attention to The Tomorrow Plan NOW and attend meetings as they come up. It is the intention of the planners that local governments start to seriously think about and implement parts of the plan by the end of 2012. Both Mayor Gaer and Councilman Ohmert said that it is uncommon to see more than a dozen, maybe two, at any given meeting – out of 56,000 that live in WDM. Folks, how we change the way we are governed starts with our local communities. If our local officials do not hear from us, nothing will change, and the train will head down the tracks with nothing to control it.
If you don’t get involved, you have no reason to complain about what happens.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
House Kills SOPA
One down, one to go.
It is reported on The Examiner today that Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) has stopped all action on SOPA, effective immediately. That means that for all intents and purposes, SOPA is now dead.
Goodbye, farewell, and amen.
PIPA is still alive in the Senate, but just barely so. Only 40 Senators have co-sponsored the bill, and 60 are needed to invoke cloture and avoid a filibuster. That’s still a possibility, but not likely.
It’s nice to see our elected officials listening to the people. I generally like Rep. Cantor, so it’s even better to see that he’s done the right thing.
UPDATE: Cantor seems to be backpedaling a bit. He’s reportedly holding off doing anything else with SOPA unless or until he gets a clear consensus from the rest of the House on what to do. So, SOPA is gasping, but not completely dead – unfortunately.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Remember, It’s All About Public Safety
C|Net posted a report today that DHS is using new x-ray scanners at border crossings. These new scanners are capable of scanning an entire cars – including occupants – as they drive through the device entering the country.
Those who know me or have followed my blog know that I am the last person that would want illegal immigrants crossing the border, or illegal substances brought into the country. I’m actually OK with subjecting a car to x-rays to search for illegal items entering the US. What I’m not OK with is DHS making the blanket statement that everything is OK with this new device, while scientists and health officials worry about the radiation exposure required to make the scanners work properly. In fact, the only people who say the devices are safe are DHS and the company that manufactures the scanners.
Go figure.
Remember though, it doesn’t matter if we bombard people with radiation that’s three times higher than what a CT scan produces. That’s not important. The only thing we have to remember is that DHS is doing this for our own good. In the meantime, here’s to hoping that people who are required to drive their car through these radiation saturation devices opt instead to get out of their cars and let the DHS agents drive the cars through for them.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Two Proposed Amendments
I was looking through the list of legislation that has been introduced in Iowa already, and there are two proposed amendments to the Iowa Constitution that look fairly interesting.
The first one is HJR 2002. This amendment would limit Iowa Senators and Representatives to a term limit of 8 years. Count me on the side of those who believe that serving office in any form of government, be it local, state, or federal, is supposed to be an honor and not a career. I know that there are those who believe that once you get into office it takes some time to “get your feet wet” and learn the ropes, but that’s all part of the fun of having been elected. We need to remind our elected officials that they don’t get to camp out and make the Iowa Statehouse their part-time home for the rest of their lives. I believe we need to do the same thing for our US elected officials as well, but that’s another story for another day. In the meantime, it would be great to see this get some traction.
The one I like even better is HJR 2003. This amendment would prohibit the use of all “automated traffic law enforcement systems.” As in, no more red light cameras or speed cameras. I don’t know if this one will see the light of day, but it damn well should. Red light and speed cameras are totally in opposition to the “innocent until proven guilty” way that our legal system is supposed to work. If any of these devices “catch” you doing something wrong, it is up to YOU to prove that you are INNOCENT. In every other facet of our legal system, the government must make the case to prove that you are guilty. The very fact that these devices exist and are daily tagging people with fines is nothing short of unconstitutional, and nothing less than money grabbing by jurisdictions under the false pretense of “public safety.”
Think about it this way. If you are pulled over by an officer for running a red light or speeding, the officer verifies that you are indeed the person behind the wheel and therefore issues a traffic summons to you. When a camera is used, it is assumed that you, as the registered owner of the vehicle, are behind the wheel. Our legal system was not based on a presumption of guilt, and it is time to take back our rights and put a stop to these automated systems for good. Don’t let the talking heads of government tell you that it’s better for the public because speeding is down, accidents are down, or whatever other statistic they want to use. In the end, it is no different than the TSA coming out of the airports to do “spot checks” with their VIPR program. Your rights are being usurped for “the public good” and that cannot be allowed under any circumstance.
What can you do? Contact your state legislators and politely, but firmly, ask them to support both of these resolutions and bring them to the floor of the House for a vote.
KCCI News has a story about HJR 2003 on their website as well.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Facebook, Part 2
In my last post, I talked a little bit about another user on Facebook who believed that I was wrong for taking a “my way or the highway” approach to liberty in this country. I never really heard back from him, so I guess I either pissed him, scared him off, or decided he couldn’t change my mind no matter what he said.
Good. Except it would have better if he had come to his senses and realized that his socialist line of thinking is wrong for this country, but I supposed that’s too much to ask.
As a true example of the brainwashing that the socialists have done to many in this country, I offer this gem of a rebuttal I got from a different user. Keep your duct tape handy…
I also don’t understand why anyone would call the Democrats the party of big government. The government always gets bigger whenever a Republican is president (and the fed consolidates power, attacks personal freedom, and all those other things that the Republican party claims to fight against) lol——bush created a pandemonium of inaccountability in this country (via his record of violating our constitution) that has turned the climate of this country into desperation, fear and hatred, and leaving an impression of Fait accompli——I feel in my heart that President Obama has done his best TO change this —maybe it IS actually irreversible —-maybe not—but one thing is for certain–NOBODY is going to change the climate of the present attitude of American citizens in this country to a good and favorable standing by actively and blatantly trying to take their social security away–defund their childrens schools—take womens personal choices for their body away from them–wipe out our EPA–(the only thing that does it’s best to keep our air clean—our water clean)—-by taking away everyones right to decent and affordable healthcare–by abolishing unions (who fight for the working mans rights)—-by trying to dictate to the people whom they have the right to marry–etc etc etc——-ALL these things are what the republican party are trying to abolish. Yes they ARE OBSTRUCTIONALISTS—-all the way—–they try to block every effort Obama makes to aid ALL DIVERSE citizens of this countrys RIGHTS (according to the Constitution) to live and prosper EQUALLY!!!!!!!—–THEY cater ONLY to the rich and powerful and to their money GOD!. If you call how Obama is trying to block THEIR efforts to stop THEIR corruption “socialism” well OK—–whatever—-(your choice!)–and thank God you still have one (not by any effort on the part of the republican party though, they seem to hate the peoples (personal) choices)——well then I see “socialism” as a damn good thing. No, a pack of liberals would not block efforts to aid ALL Americans—rich and poor alike, so your question is not especially coherent to me
The question I asked that she’s referring to is this:
If the tables were turned, and a president were trying to force a 100% conservative or libertarian agenda down the throat of the country, and you didn’t agree with it, would you still call it “obstructionism” if a pack of liberals blocked his agenda?
Can anyone spot the fundamental flaw in her thinking – in five words or less?
Take a moment to read her missive again…
Ready for the answer?
to live and prosper EQUALLY
Where in our Constitution does it say that we have the right to live and prosper equally? To all the Obama apologists and Occupy hippies out there, where do you find the support in the very document that founded this country for the ideals that you profess and espouse?
Our constitution affirms our God-given right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. It does not say anything about a right to live and prosper equally. Anywhere. Yet the socialist and liberal muckers want to weave that concept into the very fabric of this country, and the sad part is that they are succeeding!
I told this poor misguided soul that I will defend to my death the fact that there is no provision in the Constitution for equality, and that freedom and liberty are the two concepts that made this country unique over 230 years ago. If the rest of us cannot take that same stance, then it is not a matter of if our Republic is doomed to fail, but only a matter of when.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
My Way Or The Highway
I hate getting wrapped up in Internet pissing contests. But I couldn’t help standing up for our Republic during a recent “discussion” over on Facebook.
It started with a simple comment by a user that said:
…your pessimism regarding the USA when Obama gets reelected flies in the face of history. We survived 8 years of G.W., I think we can muddle through 8 years of Obama.
I had not been involved in the discussion up to this point, but felt compelled to add my two cents:
Muddle through… there will be nothing left of our Republic if we “muddle through” the Comrade-in-Chief’s total disregard of the Constitution for four more years. *You* might be willing to muddle through, but those who value liberty and freedom know that he must be removed from office before he has four more years to totally unleash his socialist agenda. Those who are a fan of Obama’s agenda should go live in France or England and leave the rest of us who place value on personal freedoms and small, weak, limited government alone to put the American Republic back on the right track.
To which, I was accused of spreading a “my way or the highway” kind of message:
That’s a fairly well written “my way or the highway” screed Sean. I believe, your unpersuasive words not withstanding, I’ll stay right here and try to get you all to see the light.
You’re damn right it’s my way or the highway!
I’ll leave you with this, Jim… show me where, in our Constitution, as it was originally intended by those who wrote it and ratified it, that Obamacare is legal. That the TSA performing random, unwarranted searches away from airports is legal. Defend for me Obama’s public statement that he will abide by some of the legislation that he signed into law, and will ignore other parts of that same legislation. Defend the concept that “czars” who have no accountability to anyone except Obama but do have the power to change every aspect of our lives is the true meaning of liberty.
It is “my way or the highway.” The Constitution is what made the country what it is. Or was, anyway. Those who are not able to abide by it or defend it need to leave and find someplace else to spread their socialist agenda, because it is not what this country was founded upon, and it is treason. I doubt that you, or anyone else who believes in “hope and change” can successfully defend what has happened to our Republic in the last three years. I will *NOT* say that every President before Obama was perfect either. All have had their share of abuses of power. But Obama…. we cannot, as a free republic, afford to muddle through with four more years of his tyrannic rule. If you can defend, without emotion, what I laid out above, I would truly consider supporting him in 2012. In fact, if you can successfully do so, I will post it on my blog.
To date, nobody has ever taken me up on the request to defend their logic for anti-gun legislation. Nobody has ever taken me up on the request to defend the illegal and unconstitutional things that the Comrade-in-Chief has done while sitting in his tyrant’s chair in The Swamp. Do you know why?
Because it cannot be done.
Anti-gun fanatics use emotion, not facts, to drive their point home. So do American Socialists. They try to play on the emotions of pity and “fairness” while falsely hiding behind the very document that they are intent on ignoring and destroying.
So once again, the call is out there. Defend the actions of Comrade-in-Chief Obama with facts. Show me where he has obeyed the very fabric that is supposed to define this Republic, as I laid out above. I will give fair coverage of it right here, and provide a place for the debate – so long as the debate does not denigrate into personal attacks.
And for the record, it is indeed my way or the highway. If you do not like what a free republic stands for, and you are instead willing to give it up for a socialist democracy that in no way resembles the concept of government as laid out in the Constitution, then you should probably go find another country to call home.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Iowa Caucus Afterthoughts
They’re finally over. After weeks of robocalls and continual TV ads, the caucuses are finally over. As you’ve probably read in many other places, Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, and Ron Paul were the “big three” winners last night. And, as you’ve also probably already heard, this really means not a lot in the overall big picture. It’s simply the result of one state’s citizens speaking their minds in a sea of 50 that make up the Republic.
Watching the results rolling in late last night and the speeches of the candidates, I had a couple of observations that I wanted to share.
First was the sheer number of people who kept invoking the name of the Great Communicator in their speeches. It was “Reagan this” and “Reagan that.” There is nobody in the race today that is anything close to Ronald Reagan. Ron Paul (and maybe Rick Santorum) might have the conservative principles that Reagan espoused, but neither of them have the same leadership and communication skills the Reagan had. And certainly, Newt’s crowd had zero right to compare him to Reagan. I just about fell out of my chair when he came on stage with a comparison to Reagan. No way, no how.
I was pleased to see Santorum and Paul do well against Romney. If it came down to a Romney vs. Obama vote, it would simply be a vote where one needs to not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Anything is better than the current Comrade-in-Chief, but voting for Romney is simply voting for something that is less perfect and marginally better than what we have now. Romney in office would be “business as usual” from the swamp. The only difference would be an “R” after his name instead of a “D”.
Newt called Ron Paul “stunningly dangerous” for this country. Really? That’s interesting. Ron Paul advocates that we stop sticking our nose in everyone’s business unless there is an absolute need to do so – like self-defense, for example. I have to admit that I have not read everything that Paul has published, but it sounds like Paul is OK with Iran developing nuclear weapons, and we (the US) should not be taking it upon ourselves to launch any preemptive strikes to destroy their program. I’m not so sure that’s a bad position to take. I grew up in the 70′s, toward the end of the Cold War era. I know what Mutually Assured Destruction (“MAD”) means. If Iran were to develop a nuclear bomb, I could see having a discussion like this with their leadership:
US – So you have a nuclear bomb now?
Iran – Yes we do! Now we can keep you capitalist Satan dogs at bay! We will use it on you if you get in our way!
US – I see. And exactly what would you do with this bomb?
Iran – We will unleash it on your cities! We will bring it to your soil and destroy Washington, or New York City, or Atlanta!
US – Interesting. You understand that you have only one bomb, right? And we have hundreds more than that, right? So if you use your one bomb against us, we will turn Iran into a sheet of glass, right? It’s known as MAD. You might want to check with the Russians and the Chinese to see how that concept has worked out for them.
Iran – Never mind then… we’ll use it on the US lapdogs in Israel! We’ll turn the Jewish people into ashes and remove them from the face of the planet!
US – Again, you do know about MAD, right? If you choose to use your new toy against the Israelis, you will suffer a swift and decisive retaliation that will leave your country uninhabitable for generations to come. The world doesn’t care that you have your shiny new bomb. You can’t use it, because if you do, the Iranian people will be removed from civilization. Build another bomb, so you have two. Or three. You still do not have enough to offset the amount of firepower that will be unleashed on your soil should you choose to misuse your great new powers.
Iran – But we’ll know that you can’t push around the Iranian people any longer! We can close the Strait of Hormuz now! We can dictate terms all across the Middle East! We can shut off the supply of oil to your capitalist factories!
US – You sure can. But if you do that, you won’t sell your oil and you won’t make money. And other countries, like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, have already agreed to increase production to offset what you shut off. Close the strait? That would be frowned upon by more than just the US, and you’d have a lot of angry neighbors. You would end up isolated with oil backing up in your tanks, your wells, your ships, your terminals. Tell me, how will you fund the research and buy the parts for your shiny new bomb if you can’t sell the only thing that even begins to make your country worth consideration in the world arena? If your neighbors close their borders with you and keep supplies from reaching Iran because you’ve closed the strait, will you use your shiny new bomb on them?
You get the point. Just because Iran has “the bomb” doesn’t mean that the US needs to be the first country in there to kick them in the teeth and take it away. Face it – we are the country that let the nuclear cat out of the bag in 1945 with the destruction of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Other countries followed, and will continue to follow. Technological evolution cannot and will not be stopped. All you can do is what the US and Russia did for decades – ensure that both sides knew what would happen if the other side did something stupid. It worked, and it kept the peace between both super powers.
So why is Ron Paul dangerous? Because he threatens to shake up the status quo in the swamp. He threatens to remove the power that has fueled ignorance and apathy and restore the very principles that founded this nation and to return us to what we were supposed to be, in the minds of our founding fathers. America is not a “good neighbor” to the rest of the world when we decide to preemptively strike other countries simply because we can and we feel like it’s our right to do so. We piss off other countries and make enemies out of them. If we maintain a strong military (that’s the important part) and remind folks that taking a swipe at us would go very poorly for them, we can and will remain a world leader.
Terrorism is going to happen. It doesn’t matter who sits in the big chair. Ron Paul at the helm would be no more dangerous than Newt or even Comrade Obama. Leading us to economic disaster by lending money to other countries and spending money on programs like the TSA that we just don’t have in the bank in the first place is equally as dangerous as not being willing to preemptively strike an Iranian nuclear plant. To me, it sounded like Newt was crying sour grapes and just lashing out at whoever was closest at the moment. I wasn’t the only one that noticed. A professional “presentation expert” graded each of the speeches last night, and it is an interesting read.
The winner of the Iowa Caucuses doesn’t always go on to find success in the rest of the country. Ask Mike Huckabee about that. It was encouraging to see Ron Paul make great progress with his campaign, though. He’s really the only person who has any sort of an understanding of what liberty and freedom are all about, and what the concept of a limited government means. Is it scary to make that kind of a change in the swamp after decades of “status quo” big government and power grabbing? Of course it is! But we’re on the edge of losing everything our founding fathers worked – and died – for over 200 years ago. Doing what we’ve done all along isn’t going to solve anything. Remember, the definition of insanity is to do the same thing over and over and expect different results.
We’re not going to get anything different by electing career politicians who believe in big government. If we want to reclaim what we’ve lost, we have to make a drastic change. The only question is – how many people will have the courage to help make that happen?
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
The Standing Army Within Us
Our founding fathers believed that a standing army was a threat to liberty. In their minds, a government that provides a standing army has nothing to fear from its citizens, since the army is there to do the dirty work of those in power – hence, becoming a tyranny.
Our standing army has been kept fairly well out of our internal affairs by the Posse Comitatus Act. But lurking within our borders, totally immune to Posse Comitatus is none other than our good friends at the TSA. Guess what, dear readers… they are about to get stronger. The bill signed by Comrade-in-Chief Obama last Friday (you know, the bill with provisions that he plans to ignore) provides a budget increase for the TSA. How much of an increase? $153 million, bringing their next annual budget up to $7.85 billion. The budget increase will cover 250 more “naked scanners” for the airports, 140 new behavior detection officers, 12 additional multi-modal Visible Intermodal Prevention and Response (VIPR) teams, 20 additional explosives detection canine teams, and 53 air cargo security staffers.
This is a real smörgåsbord of in-your-face to-hell-with-the Constitution stuff here – especially the 12 new VIPR teams.
Papers, please. If you want to travel, you’ll need to prove that you are an innocent citizen just looking to travel to grandma’s house. Otherwise, we are going to assume that you are a terrorist that is intent on bringing death and destruction to your fellow travelers.
This is insane. Our government no longer fears us, and they have every intention of us fearing them. This is not liberty. This is tyranny.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Is Obama Above the Law?
In an article posted on The Hill, Comrade-in-Chief Obama is reported as saying that he won’t be bound by a gun control ban that was present in the omnibus spending bill he signed last Friday. From the post:
“I have advised the Congress that I will not construe these provisions as preventing me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibility to recommend to the Congress’s consideration such measures as I shall judge necessary and expedient.”
The “provisions” he is referring to is language that states “none of the funds made available in this title may be used, in whole or in part, to advocate or promote gun control.”
He goes on to say that he may ignore a provision that bans any of the funding from being used to pay for the salaries and expenses for the various “czars” that he (illegally and without public accountability) appointed to run various pet projects of his. He is quoted as saying:
“[The provision] could prevent me from fulfilling my constitutional responsibilities, by denying me the assistance of senior advisers and by obstructing my supervision of executive branch officials in the execution of their statutory responsibilities. I have informed the Congress that I will interpret these provisions consistent with my constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed.”
How convenient it must be for Obama to pick and choose what “Constitutional duties” he will fulfill. He has succeeded in ignoring this important document ever since he gained office, and his public statements that he will not be bound by the provisions of the bill that he signed into law simply show his disdain for the very values under which this country was founded.
Do any of you get to choose which parts of the law you get to obey and which parts you get to ignore?
The Comrade in Chief is not overseeing a Republic. He is running a tyranny, and this is simply further proof of that statement. Signing a bill into law and, at the same time, saying publicly that he will ignore provisions of that law as he sees fit is nothing short of dictatorial. I challenge anyone who is a supporter of Obama to refute that. I’m not looking for a debate on policies here; rather, I’m looking for anyone to prove that a sitting President who refuses to obey the very legislation that he signs into law is anything but a criminal, unworthy of receiving mail at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue.
And yet, he remains in office with no repercussions. Our Senate is unable – or unwilling – to hold him accountable for his actions, while the citizens of this country refuse to stand up as a unified body and demand that accountability.
I have a T-Shirt that sums this up fairly well… “Our forefathers would be shooting by now.”
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Merry Christmas from the TSA
This information shouldn’t have visions of sugarplums dancing in your head. Instead, visions of “papers, please” should be the only thing you are seeing. America is backsliding into a land of constant surveillance, presumed guilt until proven innocent (if able to be proven at all), and out of control spending that will bankrupt this country all in the name of “security.”
My Twitter and Facebook followers saw me post a link to an article on Vanity Fair yesterday that showed exactly how easy it is to bypass “security” at our airports. Along with anecdotal stories about firearms and other weapons that make it through the checkpoints, this shows that the system is not perfect, will never be perfect, and can be easily gamed by a determined attacker.
Yet we have a TSA that is perfectly able and willing to stop a woman carrying a cupcake through McCarran Airport because it resembled a “gel substance” that poses a potential security threat. A purse with the design of a gun attached to it also poses a security threat, so it too is banned from the sterile areas of an airport.
The TSA has a budget that runs around $5 billion per year. And they are asking for more. According to an article on InfoWars, the TSA wants an additional $24 million to fund 12 more VIPR teams. These are the teams that fan out across the country and pop up on highways, at train stations, and at bus terminals. Citizens are subjected to searches and questioning, all in the name of “security.”
Let that soak in for a moment. $5 billion per year. What could we do with that money besides harass the citizens of this country? The liberals could provide more welfare programs. The hawks could resurrect some defense programs. The conservatives could pay off some debt. Anything besides the harassment of citizens otherwise legally going about their business – and doing a poor job of it, to boot.
Our foreign enemies do not need to beat us on the battlefield. They only need to beat us where it counts – our economy. The more we spend on “security” with useless results, the less there is for important things, and the more susceptible we become to foreign investments and influence. Think that’s not the case? How many assets do the Chinese own in this country?
What scares me the most are the people who swallow this bucket of bile without even thinking about it. They believe that we need big brother to watch over and protect us, because we are defenseless without it. The citizens of early 20th century Germany were fed the propaganda, believed it, and paid for it. The citizens of the mid-20th century Soviet Union were fed the propaganda, believed it, and paid for it. Cuba, China, Uganda, North Korea – pick your poison. In each case, the government stepped in to provide the ultimate in protection for the citizens, and proceeded to turn their rule into an absolute one, with an iron fist, unforgiving of any transgression, and in many cases, rounding up dissidents or those who are simply unwanted and “removing” them from the population.
When I was in the police academy, I was told that if I was scared, I should say I’m scared. Well, I’m scared. I’m scared because the liberties and freedoms that we are supposed to enjoy and make us the crown jewel of the “free” world is in serious danger of coming to an end. Our politicians don’t seem to care. Our judges don’t seem to care. Our teachers don’t seem to care. Worst of all, our citizens don’t seem to care. If the sheep that graze from the federal fields daily were to stand up, unite, and with one strong and common voice say NO! to all of this, it would go away.
But it hasn’t happened yet, and I’m scared that it never will. I’m scared that the rights that are guaranteed by our creator to every man, woman and child, and enumerated in our Bill of Rights are being ignored at an alarming rate with nobody shedding so much as a tear, let alone a drop of sweat to make a change. I’m scared that the day is coming where my kids will be unable to get in their cars and drive from Iowa to another state without having to be stopped for an inspection to ensure that they are not terrorists, all in the name of “security.”
I am not preaching a double standard here. My readers know that I am all for a strict policy against illegal immigrants. But they have to be caught first, using tight controls at the borders to our country, and probable cause & due process if captured once inside our borders. I do NOT condone the random stopping of those who “appear” to be here illegally. I do NOT condone random sweeps looking for green cards or other immigration papers unless hard and verifiable evidence exists that illegal immigrants are present at a location, and a warrant is obtained for such action. (In which case, the warrant should be issued without a great deal of trouble.)
In every post like this, I ask my readers to make noise and tell their elected officials that this is not acceptable. Have YOU done it yet? What will it take for you to do it? Once the horse is out of the barn, it’s very difficult to get it back inside. I have news for you – the horse is standing at the door and looking outside, with nostrils flaring and hooves scratching at the dirt.
2,011 years ago, the Son of God was born in Bethlehem. If he were born today in the US, would Joseph & Mary be able to travel across the land with him without being stopped? Would they find a friendly face to put them up for the night?
Merry Christmas, folks. It is my sincere hope that it is not too late to turn this situation around.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
GoDaddy Backs SOPA
Are you someone who values your liberties, freedoms, and rights?
Do you believe that the government must have a warrant before taking what is rightfully yours?
Do you believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty?
Do you have a domain, webpage, SSL cert, or any other service hosted by GoDaddy?
If you answered yes to all four of these questions, you need to reevaluate your position on the last one. GoDaddy has officially come out in support of SOPA. The only web or technology company to date that has done so. For those who are unfamiliar with SOPA, it is a proposed law that would allow the government to seize the domain names of companies who are believed to be infringing on copyrighted material. Essentially, the U.S. Government would be able to shut down a website at any time based on a suspicion. The International Business Times has a pretty good writeup about the situation on their site. Doing a Google search on SOPA will yield many results as well.
We cannot allow SOPA to become law. The government tells us to trust them, as they will never become a censorship like China, Iran, or Syria. History tells us otherwise. Once or government is given that absolute power, it will corrupt absolutely.
Keep pressure on your U.S. Representative to block the passage of SOPA. Failure to do so will fundamentally change the Internet as we know it today.
UPDATE:
According to a report on Mashable, GoDaddy is now backing down from their support of SOPA.
It would be interesting to know if they are ideologically backing down, or just publicly backing down.
UPDATE 2:
Here is a crowd-sourced list of companies that support SOPA. Quite a list of folks to boycott.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
The Monster from the Swamp
This is not a post about a B-movie horror flick, although it might really seem like one.
From Fox News today comes a story with a headline that reads “EXCLUSIVE: EPA Ponders Expanded Regulatory Power In Name of ‘Sustainable Development’.” The swamp I’m referring to is Washington, DC. The monster is the EPA. If this headline doesn’t make you just as scared as seeing a large, scale covered monster covered with slime, teeth and claws as sharp as razors, and eyes burning as bright as the hottest fire in Hades, then you haven’t been paying attention to what’s happening in this country.
The first paragraph says it all:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency wants to change how it analyzes problems and makes decisions, in a way that would give it vastly expanded power to regulate businesses, communities and ecosystems in the name of “sustainable development,” the centerpiece of a global United Nations conference slated for Rio de Janeiro next June.
Let me translate that for you. In essence, the EPA wants to take away more of your liberty and freedom, and maybe even give up our sovereignty, next year at a UN conference. But if you don’t like what the EPA is doing, what is your recourse? The EPA, like many other federal agencies, is not accountable to the public. The only way to effect a change is to get Congress to pass laws to reel them in, and hope that the sitting President enacts them. The chances of that happening are worse than the chances of West Des Moines seeing 110 degree weather on Christmas Day.
This is the tip of the iceberg. In the name of a “greener environment” and “human cohabitation with nature” the EPA, in concert with groups from around the world, will enact and enforce tougher laws and standards. And this doesn’t stop with businesses. Notice that “communities and ecosystems” are included. For example, let’s say you owned 15 acres of land. You could suddenly find yourself unable to do anything with that land simply because the EPA doesn’t believe that it’s in the best interest of the “global plan.” You could even find yourself having part of the land taken away to support the “global plan.” To make matters worse, this is not limited to the EPA. Localities all over the country – even here in central Iowa – are embracing this concept. In reality, it’s nothing more than covert attempts to socialize the environment.
Are you ready for that? If not, then you need to start doing something NOW. Start bending the ears of your elected officials. Not just your US Senators and Reps, but the state and local level politicos as well. They need to know, without a doubt, that we will not stand for this. Our land, our sovereignty, our liberty, our freedoms are NOT for sale or negotiation. The EPA monster needs to have its legs cut off at the knees and told to back off. I’m OK with the EPA working toward a cleaner environment, but not at the cost of our liberties. No regulation should be shoved down our throats – that is NOT how this country was founded. If the EPA sees a need for a change, the proposed regulation should go through the same process as every other law. But lime many other groups, the EPA gets to operate with total autonomy. Comrade President Obama would be the last person to derail their socialist agenda, so it’s going to have to come from the bottom up.
Start now folks, or the country that our descendants will inherit from us will be far different than the one we live in now – and we are already far off course from where our founding fathers intended us to be.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. “Like” or “Share” the posts on Facebook, “RT” them on Twitter, and “+1″ them on Google+. All of that will help spread the word! Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
New Book About The Constitution
As some of you know, my brother is Brion McClanahan, Ph.D. of American History and author of the book “The Politically Incorrect Guide to the Founding Fathers.” If you have not yet picked up a copy of this book, you should add it to your library.
On January 9, Brion’s next book will hit the shelves, titled ”The Founding Fathers Guide to the Constitution.” According to Brion, his goal for the book was:
… to make a readable, concise (almost) clause by clause introduction to the Constitution “as ratified.” I actually came up with the idea from James A. Bayard, the younger. I wrote my dissertation on him and he practically did the same thing in 1836. I wrote about him, his father, and his son in my forthcoming Forgotten Conservatives in American History.
As I make this post, I’m about halfway through the book, and I can tell you that he’s done an excellent job of doing exactly what he set out to do. Each section goes into detail about the intentions of the Constitution’s authors, and each section wraps up with a “down to the brass tacks” paragraph that sums up the section quite nicely. This is the book that needs to be on the required reading list in our high school government classes, and in the hands of each of our elected officials. (Not that our Comrade-in-Chief would actually bother to read it.)
In fact, I’m going to take on the challenge of personally getting this book into the hands of elected officials, both at the state and federal levels. How about you? Will you do the same? The fight to regain what we, as a people and a society have lost, needs to start right here and right now. It’s time to help politicians unlearn what the political machine has taught them. It’s also time to reacquaint ourselves with what our founding fathers had in mind for our system of government. If we cannot read and understand the concepts in this book, how can we expect our elected “leaders” to do the same thing?
Change starts with each of us. Knowledge is power. Use what you will read in both of these books to gain a greater understanding of how we are supposed to be governed (hint: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness), and with that knowledge, you will have the power to effect change and counter the liberal agenda.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Colt Does It Again
Back on August 29, I made a post about Colt threatening to leave New England if microstamping laws were enacted. It looks like Colt will be leaving New England (actually, Connecticut, to be exact) and heading to Florida anyway. (Here’s a link to the news on a blog called “Angry White Dude.” He’s a bit more animated about the news than I am.) The best part is that the move has nothing to do with microstamping; rather, it has everything to do with the fundamentals of running a business. You see, Florida is a “right to work” state, while Connecticut is apparently not so. Colt figures that it can continue to produce firearms at a lower cost in Florida by using non-union workers, with non-union demand, non-union wages, non-union pensions, and an environment that is generally friendlier to businesses.
Wow, who would have seen that coming?
Businesses are the driving force of our economy. When states – or the feds – create a climate that is not conducive to the growth of a business, it will do one of two things: move or fold. Many have done the latter, unfortunately. Some have done the former. But the net result is the same in either case. Loss of jobs and a loss of tax revenue.
What do the liberals believe is the right answer when businesses fold or move, and revenues go down? Raise taxes on everyone else! There’s a shortfall, so it’s time to up the taxes on the rest of the people who are still hanging around. This creates an even more unfavorable climate, so more businesses fold or move, and the cycle starts again. They can’t seem to see the forest for the trees. The answer is not to make the climate more unbearable. The answer is to attract new businesses back to the state (or the country) and make it worthwhile to open up shop again.
Unions are just as bad as higher taxes. Unions, under the guise of “better conditions for the workers,” force companies to spend more on labor and make it difficult to operate with true supply-side economics. Case in point – if an employee is under-performing in a right to work state, there are several options available to the company, up to and including being terminated for poor performance. Not so with a union job. If you’re a union worker, and you are under-performing, you know that your job is safe and sound until a great deal of work has been done to prove that you’re unfit for the job. A good example of that is in our public schools, where teachers enjoy a protected environment thanks to teacher’s unions. The ones who really lose are the kids who get stuck with teachers who don’t belong in the system, and the taxpayers who pay for the substandard performance.
Do you think the Connecticut lawmakers and union bosses will see this move for what it is? Of course not. They will see it as Colt acting selfishly and even un-American. What they fail to understand is that Colt is acting as American as apple pie. It is the American way to pursue a prosperous livelihood and to run a successful business. It is the American way to have the liberty to move to whatever state provides you or your company the best chances to do that.
Good for Colt.
12/14/11 Update: Here is a link to a story published by The Hartford Courant about the possible move.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Friday Morning Ruminations
I had two things to contemplate this morning on the way into work.
The first one is a story that’s probably been seen by everyone, and undoubtedly has strong reactions on both sides of the gun rights debate. Four years after Seung-Hui Cho went on a killing spree at Virginia Tech, the school was rocked yet again by tragic deaths at the hands of an unstable man with a firearm. Of course, the Brady Bunch will point to the need for even more gun control laws as a result of this most recent attack. But it is already illegal to possess a firearm on campus. Truth be told, it was illegal to possess a firearm on campus in 2007, too. So with that in mind, will tougher gun laws solve anything? The dirty little secret that the anti-gun side never seems to acknowledge is that firearms free zones have never, ever worked. Chicago, DC, Maryland, New Jersey, California, NYC – all are examples of places that treat firearms like nasty, evil objects – some being banned outright. In spite of their draconian anti-firearm laws, all of them continue to see problems with gun violence.
I don’t want any of my readers to connect the dots into thinking that I believe that allowing firearms on campus would have prevented yesterday’s tragedy. I’m not saying that. What I am saying is that laws which prohibit the owning, possession, or carrying of firearms cannot and will not stop bad things from happening. The liberal anti-gun side of the equation will not admit that fact, and if presented with it during a debate, they will shift the focus elsewhere. That’s a fact that they cannot refute.
I do believe that laws and rules to prohibit good people from keeping and bearing arms simply because they’ve crossed over an imaginary line on the ground – whether it be a park, forest, school, government property, hospital, airport, or any other type of property – is insane. The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. Gun laws have been passed and strengthened time and again since the early 1900′s. Yet nothing changes. Bad guys still get their guns, while citizens (and law enforcement officers) suffer the consequences. So who are the insane one? Those who believe in supporting liberty, or those who believe that liberty should be trampled on in the name of “public safety?”
–
While thinking about all that on the morning drive, Rush Limbaugh had a quick story about the Department of Justice sending Alabama police and Sheriff departments a stern letter telling them not to enforce their new anti-immigration laws on Hispanics, or they would face a cut-off of federal funding. Rush went on to say the Alabama police chiefs and Sheriffs should write back asking the DoJ if they were ever going to come clean in their own house, with things like Fast & Furious or the Black Panther scandal.
I have a better idea. The police chiefs and Sheriffs should write back and say “thanks but no thanks.” When you become dependent on handouts from Big Brother, you immediately allow the Fed to tell you what to do and how to run your department. If Alabama law enforcement offices stop being on the Federal dole, DoJ would lose the ability to carry that stick and beat people with it.
Answering the DoJ letters with admonitions to get their own act together will solve nothing at all. The DoJ, led by Comrade AG Holder, has no conscience. They are part of a Federal machine that has grown too large, and has lost sight with the concepts of liberty and freedom. To them, along with their lap dogs the TSA, you and I are guilty until proven innocent. As long as the Alabama Sheriffs and police chiefs (and law enforcement offices across the country) accept money from the DoJ, or any other Federal entity, they cannot complain about having policy dictated to them. That’s common sense, and it’s time that they wake up and smell the coffee.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
Slaves or Subjects?
The Second Amendment protects the First. Well, not just the First, but all of them. It is because we have a right to keep and bear arms that our government is not able to blindly push a tyrannical rule down our collective throats. Oh, they try time and again, and over the years they’ve been successful at chipping away at our freedoms little by little. In fact, we’ve probably lost more liberty in my lifetime than all of my ancestors put together. I fear for what will happen during the lifetime of my children, if things don’t get reset and put back on the path of what our founding fathers envisioned for our country.
“A republic, if you can keep it.”
No truer words were ever spoken than those seven. Benjamin Franklin uttered those words in 1787, and the true meaning of those words still reverberate 224 years later.
I saw two videos today that got me thinking about this subject. The first one was by Sheriff Mack. Those of you unfamiliar with him should check out his website. If all the Sheriffs in the United States were like this man, our federal government would be safely contained to its own little sandbox with the powers only given to it by our Constitution. I wonder how many Sheriffs will take the time to read the book that he has sent to each one of them; and further, how many will actually heed the message.
The video I’m referring to was posted up on You Tube. It’s almost 30 minutes long, but it is well worth your attention.
The next video was shared by National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea. In this video, the Mayor of El Paso cuts off a resident who is addressing her concerns about his government to him. Under the threat of forcible removal (with a police officer in the background with his hand on his service weapon), the resident is told to take her First Amendment rights outside. So in this case, the First Amendment is squashed with the threat of being forcibly removed being given to enforce it. If anyone else in that room had been standing with a hand on a gun, there would have been howls of protest. But let the Mayor usurp a citizen’s right by having one of his law enforcement officers stand behind her doing the same thing… and it’s all supposed to be OK, right?
As I was putting together this post, an e-mail popped up advising of an 85-year-old woman who was strip searched at JFK airport. The kicker here is that our good friends in the TSA are denying that the incident ever took place. She’s threatening to sue – and with good reason. The TSA is a multi-billion dollar black hole of federal funding that manages to trample on people’s rights every day, all in the name of “safety and security.” I guarantee that privately owned and operated security agencies could do a better job than the TSA with fewer complaints and more effectiveness. Why? Because a private corporation has investors or owners to answer to, not a government that has become totally unresponsive to the citizens it is supposed to represent.
How long will we stand by and let our liberties erode before we say enough is enough? How long will we continue to allow ourselves to take money from the federal government in return for this or that program that chips away at our independence and freedom? It’s time for our elected officials at the state and local level (Sheriffs included!) to tell the feds “thanks but no thanks” to their money. Tell them to keep their money, pay down the federal debt, and let the states and localities take care of themselves.
This is America! Our spirit is built on self-reliance and our ability to improvise, adapt, and overcome. When we take welfare, grants, and other federal money, we immediately become servants of the federal machine. The federal government wants nothing more than to makes us all disarmed and reliant on them at every waking moment for every daily need.
As we allow our independence and liberty to become distant memories of a culture that once was, we become one of two things: slaves or subjects. Do you see yourself as either of these? What will it take for you to wake up and say no more? What will it take for you to get involved and make a change?
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
More Gunwalker Evidence
Once again, David Codrea and Mike Vanderboegh produce damning evidence that the ATF was fully aware of what Project Gunwalker was all about. While Mexican President Calderon stands in our Capitol and complains about the firearms that flow into his country, pleading with legislators to put an end to the “easy access” of firearms from north of the border, and the Brady Bunch teat-suckers like Bloomberg, McCarthy, and Feinstein all bemoan how our laws allow evil black weapons to cross the border and fuel the drug wars, it was our own ATF that happily provided firearms to Mexico.
With friends like that, who needs enemies, right?
It will be fascinating to see how many news outlets pick up on this. My guess is that you will be able to count it on one hand. Mainstream media is still caught in a lovefest with the Obama regime, and news like this just won’t do for a good image of the Comrade-in-Chief.
Truth hurts.
Above The Law
It should be no surprise to my regular readers that I’m a bit jaded when it comes to our politicians. There are a few of them out there who actually do the right thing and try to act in the best interest of their constituents, uphold the Constitution, behave in an ethical manner, and generally uphold the ideals that our founding fathers espoused for those who occupy the legislative branch of government. For the most part, though, the legislators who work in the swamplands of DC are no better than the alligators and pythons that occupy the swamplands of Florida. In fact, you’re probably doing alligators and pythons a disservice by comparing them to the legislators under the big white dome.
The most recent example of our elected officials believing that their status as a Representative or Senator automatically entitles them to anything they want comes from none other than our good friend Sen. Dianne Feinstein. The Democrat from the People’s Republic of California has never missed an opportunity to denounce the Second Amendment any time it suits her. Our most recent example has this fine elected official knowingly breaking the law to suit her whims and desires. According to National Gun Rights Examiner David Codrea, Sen. Feinstein used ATF gun trace data that should have been off-limits to her by virtue of the Tiahrt Amendment in a recent Senate Judiciary Committee meeting.
It’s true that Sen. Feinstein may not have even realized she was breaking the law. Then again, she would most likely be the very first person to tell any firearms owner that ignorance is no defense for breaking the law. As one of the most vocal opponents of your right to even own a firearm, much less carry or use it, you’d think that she would know exactly what the Tiahrt Amendment says and how it pertains to her ability to gather and disseminate ATF data.
As usual David has done a great job on the story. It would be nice for it to gain some traction and see Sen. Feinstein get punched in the nose for her transgression. But one thing is certain – the legislators know how to circle the wagons, and they know that us commoners won’t be able to do anything more than whine and complain about it. We see the same thing with the illegal activities of AG Holder and the Comrade-in-Chief himself. We complain loudly, many times, and demand that something should be done to punish them for actions that are in direct violation of our Constitution. But in the end, legislators will wink an eye, slap each other on the back, and decide that yet again life will go on in the swamp with no serious penalties received.
And the longer it goes on like that, the further down the drain our government will swirl.
–
I came across this news story on The Hill a bit after I made the original post above. It does a fairly good job of showing you exactly what I was talking about, with regards to politicians not having the cajones to do what’s right and hold their peers accountable for unethical or illegal actions. What’s most depressing is our own Governor is on the list of those that are not onboard to press for Holder’s resignation. I would have hoped that Gov. Branstad would have been right up there looking for Holder’s head on a platter, but perhaps that was just wishful thinking on my part.
—–
HEY! You there, reading this post!
If you enjoyed this post, please use the buttons below to share it on your favorite social network. (Google+ isn’t shown there yet, but that’s a great social network to use.) I depend on word of mouth to grow my readership. Comments are also welcome, and don’t forget, you can subscribe to my blog to get instant updates when I make a new post.
The Christmas Tree Tax
No lengthy post here… just a link to an interesting blog post over on The Foundry titled:
Obama Couldn’t Wait: His New Christmas Tree Tax
The title and article are self-explanatory. More idiocy from the Comrade-in-Chief as he finds new ways to fund an already overgrown federal footprint.
Recent Comments